Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 112

Thread: Arguments for the Existence of God

  1. #11
    Veteran Member Petros Agapetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last Online
    01-20-2017 @ 05:27 AM
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Meta-Ethnicity
    East Caucasian
    Ethnicity
    Armenian
    Country
    Canada
    Region
    Alberta
    Taxonomy
    East Alpine - East Med
    Politics
    Secular Liberal, Progressive Leftist
    Hero
    Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Robert Spencer, Bernie Sanders, Atheism-is-Unstoppable
    Religion
    Atheist
    Gender
    Posts
    3,510
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 904/372
    Given: 663/24

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by catgeorge View Post
    The good ol' Creationist v Evolution Big Battle.

    For the evolutionists.... the birth of a child is creationist FYI.

    Bit of truth in both without absolutism in either.
    The theory of evolution describes the development of species living on Earth. It has nothing to do with God.
    Whether one is an evolutionist only undermines some interpretative traditions of Biblical myths, but not God.
    There could be a God, yet the way he chose to create us is through evolution.

    Last edited by Petros Agapetos; 11-26-2016 at 09:17 PM.

  2. #12
    Veteran Member Petros Agapetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last Online
    01-20-2017 @ 05:27 AM
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Meta-Ethnicity
    East Caucasian
    Ethnicity
    Armenian
    Country
    Canada
    Region
    Alberta
    Taxonomy
    East Alpine - East Med
    Politics
    Secular Liberal, Progressive Leftist
    Hero
    Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Robert Spencer, Bernie Sanders, Atheism-is-Unstoppable
    Religion
    Atheist
    Gender
    Posts
    3,510
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 904/372
    Given: 663/24

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Which argument for the existence of God do you find more convincing?

    Ontological, Transcendental (TAG), Divine Command, Natural Law, Moral, Teleological, etc.

    I have listed the first three theories so far. I will continue to post material here about the other arguments for God's existence.

    The Ontological (existence) argument of God defines God as a necessarily existent being, which must exist at least in one possible world, then asserts that because of an exception (special pleading) to God's necessarily existent properties, including existence, he must therefore exist in all possible worlds, because it is greater to exist in all possible worlds than just one possible world. God is the greatest conceivable being. It is greater to both exist and be conceived of, than just be conceived of. Therefore, the idea of God refers to God's existence. Therefore God exists.

    This is my take on the Ontological argument for the existence of a God. Do you find it compelling?
    Last edited by Petros Agapetos; 11-27-2016 at 09:23 PM.

  3. #13
    Hatchling Apricity Funding Member
    "Friend of Apricity"

    Wota fuq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    -
    Country
    Australia
    Region
    California
    Gender
    Posts
    12,883
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 6,867/419
    Given: 10,250/97

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petros Agapetos View Post
    Modal ontological argument
    This is a version of the argument defended by such apologists as Alvin Plantinga. The premises are as follows:
     P(1): It is possible that God exists.
     P(2): If it is possible that God exists, then God exists in some possible worlds.
     P(3): If God exists in some possible worlds, then God exists in all possible worlds.
     P(4): If God exists in all possible worlds, then God exists in the actual world.
     P(5): If God exists in the actual world, then God exists.
     C(1): Therefore, God exists.

    Counter argument
    The Modal Ontological Argument is a deductive argument, which means that in order to deny the conclusion of the argument one must show the form of the argument to be invalid, that at least one of the premises are false, or that the argument commits some other fallacy.
    As a way to show the argument contains a fallacy, one could substitute something like a necessarily existing unicorn into the argument instead of God.
     P(1)': It is possible that a necessarily existing unicorn exists.
     P(2)': If it is possible that a necessarily existing unicorn exists, then a necessarily existing unicorn exists in some possible worlds.
     P(3)': If a necessarily existing unicorn exists in some possible worlds, then a necessarily existing unicorn exists in all possible worlds.
     P(4)': If a necessarily existing unicorn exists in all possible worlds, then a necessarily existing unicorn exists in the actual world.
     P(5)': If a necessarily existing unicorn exists in the actual world, then a necessarily existing unicorn exists.
     C(1)': Therefore, a necessarily existing unicorn exists.
    I don't think someone can stretch this argument to unicorns or everything else just like that. We are discussing God-maximum being, creator of everything, not unicorns. Do we by unicorn have on mind a creator of heavens and the earth? Can you watch this video and tell me what you think? The part from 4:01-4:07 requirs an additional philosophical reasoning for a laymen why is that.

  4. #14
    Veteran Member Petros Agapetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last Online
    01-20-2017 @ 05:27 AM
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Meta-Ethnicity
    East Caucasian
    Ethnicity
    Armenian
    Country
    Canada
    Region
    Alberta
    Taxonomy
    East Alpine - East Med
    Politics
    Secular Liberal, Progressive Leftist
    Hero
    Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Robert Spencer, Bernie Sanders, Atheism-is-Unstoppable
    Religion
    Atheist
    Gender
    Posts
    3,510
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 904/372
    Given: 663/24

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Slivovitz View Post
    I don't think someone can stretch this argument to unicorns or everything else just like that. We are discussing God-maximum being, creator of everything, not unicorns. Do we by unicorn have on mind a creator of heavens and the earth? Can you watch this video and tell me what you think? The part from 4:01-4:07 requirs an additional philosophical reasoning for a laymen why is that.
    But they are not regular unicorns, they are necessarily existing supernatural transcendent equines with one horn on their heads. I have given you a creature that is, from your point of view, not falsifiable. You cannot prove to me that there is no tea pot flying in Mars' orbit, but given the lack of evidence that such a thing is even possible, we withhold belief in the claim. That's skepticism and correcting the misplacement of the burden of proof.

    I just asserted all the properties that I need this transcendent creator to have for it to exist. The Ontological argument defines God into existence, making use of our intuition that God is a necessarily existing thing being the greatest conceivable being But just because the idea of this exists, doesn't mean the item the idea is referring to exists. I have a lot of ideas of logically possible creatures, but not all of them exist.
    Last edited by Petros Agapetos; 11-27-2016 at 09:26 PM.

  5. #15
    Arnaud Swarthynigger Linebacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Genetically engineered
    Country
    Bulgaria
    Y-DNA
    Forced Evolutionary Virus
    Taxonomy
    Archaic Neanderthaloid + Cromagnoid
    Hero
    High Energy people
    Religion
    Fitness Master Race
    Age
    22
    Gender
    Posts
    11,387
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 14,767/1,246
    Given: 1,653/0

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    There is no existence of a god

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 11:45 PM
    Location
    Athens
    Ethnicity
    Hellenic
    Country
    Greece
    Gender
    Posts
    948
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 543/27
    Given: 438/260

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petros Agapetos View Post
    Which argument for the existence of God do you find more convincing?

    Ontological, Transcendental (TAG), Divine Command, Natural Law, Moral, Teleological, etc.

    I have listed the first three theories so far. I will continue to post material here about the other arguments for God's existence.

    The Ontological (existence) argument of God defines God as a necessarily existent being, which must exist at least in one possible world, then asserts that because of an exception (common pleading) to God's necessarily existent properties, including existence, he must therefore exist in all possible worlds, because it is greater to exist in all possible worlds than just one possible world. God is the greatest conceivable being. It is greater to both exist and be conceived of, than just be conceived of. Therefore, the idea of God refers to God's existence. Therefore God exists.

    This is my take on the Ontological argument for the existence of a God. Do you find it compelling?
    It's isn't compelling. First of all I would say to them that I don't understand what a 'greatest conceivable being' is supposed to be.. A 'greatest conceivable being' doesn't exist as an idea but as multiple ideas because different people understand this phrase in different ways. 'Existing as an idea' means it is fictional. Beings 'greater' than humans can exist but non-material beings aren't really conceivable for me and it's unclear what makes a being greater. They also assume that a non-material being is greater than a material one.

  7. #17
    Hatchling Apricity Funding Member
    "Friend of Apricity"

    Wota fuq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    -
    Country
    Australia
    Region
    California
    Gender
    Posts
    12,883
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 6,867/419
    Given: 10,250/97

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Petros Agapetos View Post
    But they are not regular unicorns, they are necessarily existing supernatural transcendent equines with one horn on their heads.
    I just asserted all the properties that I needed it to exist. The Ontological argument defines God into existence, making use of our intuition that God is a necessarily existing thing being the greatest conceivable being But just because the idea of this exists, doesn't mean the item the idea is referring to exists. I have a lot of ideas of logically possible creatures, but not all of them exist.
    Then those unicorns are God. When I or person X define God we assume God who created the Universe, humans, along with humans the idea of unicorns and unicorns if they exist. You can't just use unicorns as a counterargument for the existence of God.

  8. #18
    Veteran Member Apricity Funding Member
    "Friend of Apricity"

    Charles Bronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    .
    Country
    Turkey
    Y-DNA
    O-M176
    Gender
    Posts
    3,278
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 2,375/191
    Given: 3,601/371

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default




  9. #19
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 04:08 AM
    Ethnicity
    not of European descent
    Country
    Quebec
    Gender
    Posts
    1,090
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 697/168
    Given: 331/243

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default


  10. #20
    Veteran Member Petros Agapetos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last Online
    01-20-2017 @ 05:27 AM
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Meta-Ethnicity
    East Caucasian
    Ethnicity
    Armenian
    Country
    Canada
    Region
    Alberta
    Taxonomy
    East Alpine - East Med
    Politics
    Secular Liberal, Progressive Leftist
    Hero
    Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Robert Spencer, Bernie Sanders, Atheism-is-Unstoppable
    Religion
    Atheist
    Gender
    Posts
    3,510
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 904/372
    Given: 663/24

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Default

    Does anyone fall for presuppositional apologetics? I can hopefully help your way out of it.
    An example of a presuppositionalist argument that I think is subtle and sophisticated is the Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God, or TAG.

    The Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God (TAG) is the argument that attempts to prove God's existence by arguing that logic, morals, and science ultimately presuppose a supreme being, and that God must be the source of logic and morals.

    The TAG is a transcendental argument that attempts to prove that God is the precondition of all human knowledge and experience, by demonstrating the impossibility of the contrary; in other words, that logic, reason, or morality cannot exist without God. The argument proceeds as follows:

    P1.God (most often God is defined as the supreme entity found in Christianity), is a necessary precondition for knowledge (logical reasoning, morality).
    P2.People know things (have logical, and moral intuitions).
    C.Therefore, God exists.

Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. arguments for "if god exists he must be evil"
    By revealman in forum Atheism
    Replies: 77
    Last Post: 03-21-2017, 04:06 PM
  2. Which TA arguments are the worst?
    By Szegedist in forum Off-topic
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 11-08-2016, 11:07 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •