Pick your favorite argument for Christianity and let's discuss.

e v e

Active member
none of those arguments are valid. the whole concept of proving He exists to an atheist is bizarre...plus the entire method is greek, as are the type of questions.

A bit like proving whales exist to an ant.
The ant can't experience the whale, and if they did, would they understand the context anyway?
 

bigthinker

Active member
none of those arguments are valid. the whole concept of proving He exists to an atheist is bizarre...plus the entire method is greek, as are the type of questions.

A bit like proving whales exist to an ant.
The ant can't experience the whale, and if they did, would they understand the context anyway?
Not only are they not valid, they aren't really arguments. A believer posted the link to me as if thinking it was meaningful. The point is that existence isn't based on arguments, it is based on evidence. One doesn't need 20 arguments to convince someone that water boils at 212F, one only needs to test it.
But in this case humans are not like ants; we can distinguish between existence and non-existence; full understanding of the thing isn't a prerequisite. Understanding of the thing is a result of study and of course being able to study a thing is fully dependent upon its existence.
 

e v e

Active member
Not only are they not valid, they aren't really arguments. A believer posted the link to me as if thinking it was meaningful. The point is that existence isn't based on arguments, it is based on evidence. One doesn't need 20 arguments to convince someone that water boils at 212F, one only needs to test it.
But in this case humans are not like ants; we can distinguish between existence and non-existence; full understanding of the thing isn't a prerequisite. Understanding of the thing is a result of study and of course being able to study a thing is fully dependent upon its existence.
the point is to meet Him and understand what He wants directly.

Scripture was altered over centuries to prevent that.

each soul must be his own translator without experts in between
 

bigthinker

Active member
the point is to meet Him and understand what He wants directly.

Scripture was altered over centuries to prevent that.

each soul must be his own translator without experts in between
Quite right. Each believer has their own god, made in their own idealized image. Often there is some degree of similarity between individuals but each creates their own without experts in between their beliefs and their created gods.
 

e v e

Active member
Quite right. Each believer has their own god, made in their own idealized image. Often there is some degree of similarity between individuals but each creates their own without experts in between their beliefs and their created gods.
no. i didn’t say that.

i said a soul can experience God, without experts filtering that and judging it.

I didn’t give the plato version you gave of each having an idol.
 

Gary Mac

Member
Quite right. Each believer has their own god, made in their own idealized image. Often there is some degree of similarity between individuals but each creates their own without experts in between their beliefs and their created gods.
Yes and the laws you have created for God are no different from any denomination who do the same, just different laws to govern God.
 

bigthinker

Active member
no. i didn’t say that.

i said a soul can experience God, without experts filtering that and judging it.

I didn’t give the plato version you gave of each having an idol.
I didn't say anything about idols; I said that each believer creates their own God. Although it is entirely possible for a believer to create both their God AND an idol.
 

e v e

Active member
I didn't say anything about idols; I said that each believer creates their own God. Although it is entirely possible for a believer to create both their God AND an idol.
what i said is that a soul can meet God.

a soul does not create Him.
 

e v e

Active member
i worked as both a programmer for many years, then later going into academia as philosophy prof. for many years. evidence of the type you want is pointless.
 
Top