We want REASONS for God!!!!!

a reply to: zazzafrazz

Yet you bring Christianity is an the argument. The whole religion thing and god is a tool to make you all argue, creating emotional energies that serve another purpose. Stick with it, or don't. I don't need to argue about it as it the arguing/debating that is the goal of a 'godling' not the actual beliefs.

Lol I haven't engaged anyone on the topic of my religion because no one has yet to get past the first three arguments or concede them.

a reply to: Akragon

What... you think im an Atheist?

That would be my initial assumption unless someone states otherwise.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Ill repost your OP.

If we cannot agree on these we will never make it to the second question of, why the Christian God?

4. Historical Evidence for Christ and his Resurrection.
5. All Attributes of above arguments are attributed to the Christian God.

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: Akragon

What... you think im an Atheist?

That would be my initial assumption unless someone states otherwise.

We've had quite a few discussions on this forum...

You should know better by now

a reply to: mOjOm

If you mean absolute moral truths then no there are none. Any moral truth that one thinks exists is only true to themselves and would be grounded in themselves. The universe is neither moral or immoral. It just is.

Please tell me you see that this view would leave no room for an actual moral reality. It denies the ontology of moral values as a whole. So if I where to ask you is it true that is is evil to rape babies, your response would be something along the lines of there is no moral truth to the situation only preference?

a reply to: zazzafrazz

Ill repost your OP.

Yea it says the exact same thing I said above. "If we haven't talked about the first question I will ignore anything on the second question as one must come before the other." That shouldn't even be a topic of the discussion until an agreement is reached that a being as defined by those arguments exists necessarily.

a reply to: Akragon

Lots of people. Refresh my memory.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

my situation or beliefs are not the issue... this is your thread...

Address some of the questions or statements that have been made by those that are participating in YOUR thread

Im Far from an Atheist... that assumption is merely dancing around the statement i offered

Said God you're speaking of (OT & NT) does not understand morality in any sense of the word

And saying "hes God" he can do what he wants is not a valid answer

a reply to: akushla99

...resorting to morality is an emotionally charged red herring, imparting the chosen god with all-too-human attributes that suffer from the vagaries of non-OMNI status...anything argued from this position, including morality, holds presumptions that are pure invention.

Ok your claiming a deductive argument is a red herring to distract from the idea that God exists? That we attribute human attributes to him? What presumptions are you talking about? If your going to have a discussion formulate an argument that shows what your saying to be the case don't just claim it.

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: akushla99

...resorting to morality is an emotionally charged red herring, imparting the chosen god with all-too-human attributes that suffer from the vagaries of non-OMNI status...anything argued from this position, including morality, holds presumptions that are pure invention.

Ok your claiming a deductive argument is a red herring to distract from the idea that God exists? That we attribute human attributes to him? What presumptions are you talking about? If your going to have a discussion formulate an argument that shows what your saying to be the case don't just claim it.

No. The deductive argument begins when when you limit an Allmighty, Allpowerful, Allknowing Source, to morals that cannot be attributed to it...I'm not breaking the argument down, I'm beginning and ending at the phrase 'everything that ever was, is and ever will be, comes from me...'

...any 'argument' that gilds this with, for instance - morality - is making a huuuge ass-umption...

Å99

a reply to: akushla99

Right ok.

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: akushla99

Right ok.

Right. Therefore, how do you make it to the second question?

Å99

a reply to: akushla99

I don't even know how to have a discussion with you much less pass the first question. You have given no reasons to think what I am saying is wrong other than claiming it was a red herring? And you have given no reasons to think what you have said is right...

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: akushla99

I don't even know how to have a discussion with you much less pass the first question. You have given no reasons to think what I am saying is wrong other than claiming it was a red herring? And you have given no reasons to think what you have said is right...

What's Your answer to the first question?

Å99

a reply to: akushla99

Why does their need to be a God?
Arguments 1-3 argue for the necessary existence of a being with specific properties. Key words here necessary existence meaning it must exists in all possible worlds.

What is he like?
Arguments 1-3 imply certain necessary properties to the being in question .

If you want to go more in depth we will have to take it one argument at a time

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: akushla99

Why does their need to be a God?
Arguments 1-3 argue for the necessary existence of a being with specific properties. Key words here necessary existence meaning it must exists in all possible worlds.

What is he like?
Arguments 1-3 imply certain necessary properties to the being in question .

If you want to go more in depth we will have to take it one argument at a time

That we logicicise any of this makes no difference to a process that rolls along according to its own mechanics...that's pretty much all there is that needs to be known...and the 'morality' of it (question one) is unanswerable...otherwise any claiming to know anything of ITS morality is conferring themselves with god-like status...record is skipping on question one...

How 'in depth' can you go without admitting you do not have god-like status?

Å99

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Raping is is objectively evil, now that we have the cleared up is it true that raping babies is evil?

No it's not. I don't agree that we've cleared that up at all.

Are you calling the current state of the world evil?

No. I'm saying our world exhibits absolutely no proof that god is good.

Let me give you another version of the argument it might make things more clear.
1. If God does not exist, then objective moral values do not exist.
2. Evil exists.
3. Therefore, objective moral values exist. 4. Therefore, God exists.

Nice try, but no cigar for you!

Our world exhibits no proof of either objective "good" nor "evil", nor of any objective sense of morality, empathy or justice.

a reply to: akushla99

That we logicicise any of this makes no difference to a process that rolls along according to its own mechanics

Are you equating essential properties with mechanics?

otherwise any claiming to know anything of ITS morality is conferring themselves with god-like status...record is skipping on question one... How 'in depth' can you go without admitting you do not have god-like status?

Are you claiming that anyone who claims to know of God's morality is bestowing themselves with a status of god-like status?

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: akushla99

That we logicicise any of this makes no difference to a process that rolls along according to its own mechanics

Are you equating essential properties with mechanics?

otherwise any claiming to know anything of ITS morality is conferring themselves with god-like status...record is skipping on question one... How 'in depth' can you go without admitting you do not have god-like status?

Are you claiming that anyone who claims to know of God's morality is bestowing themselves with a status of god-like status?

reply to Q1: What 'property' is 'essential'?

reply to Q2: No. They may just be entertaining delusions...and that's ok...as long as we understand that they would have no way of knowing what a Gods' morality IS.

Å99

a reply to: akushla99

reply to Q1: What 'property' is 'essential'?

A property is essential if it is an attribute or set of attributes that make an entity or substance what it fundamentally is, and which it has by necessity, and without which it loses its identity.

So for example, a square necessarily has 4 sides. Having 4 sides is an essential property of squares as without four sides add more or less its not longer a square.

No. They may just be entertaining delusions...and that's ok...as long as we understand that they would have no way of knowing what a Gods' morality IS.

Ok, but what reason do you have for believing such a thing? Could not an omnipotent being grant us this knowledge