Total Posts:122|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Christians reduced God to a logical argument

Harikrish
Posts: 39,104
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

P1. God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

P2. Objective moral values do exist.

P3. Therefore, God exists.

It appears from the logical argument the evidence for objective morality is higher than the evidence for God and, we can at best only deduce from objective morality the probability of God's existence. That is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.
WoeJ
Posts: 1,339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2018 8:20:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

P1. God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

P2. Objective moral values do exist.

P3. Therefore, God exists.

It appears from the logical argument the evidence for objective morality is higher than the evidence for God and, we can at best only deduce from objective morality the probability of God's existence. That is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.

Of course, a god would not solve the problem that they claim it solves. Morality from God would still be a subjective opinion.
12_13
Posts: 2,575
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2018 8:22:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute?

The problem seems to be that the evidence is so overwhelming that it makes some people blind. Or perhaps some people just don"t want to see. Luckily, the point in Bible is not that people believe God exists, but that people would understand what is good and right and want that what is good, because they understand it is good.
ethang5
Posts: 23,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/4/2018 9:19:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

P1. God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

P2. Objective moral values do exist.

P3. Therefore, God exists.

It appears from the logical argument the evidence for objective morality is higher than the evidence for God and, we can at best only deduce from objective morality the probability of God's existence. That is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.

Would a virulent racist know what was objectively moral?
Harikrish
Posts: 39,104
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2018 12:12:20 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/4/2018 8:20:35 PM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

P1. God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

P2. Objective moral values do exist.

P3. Therefore, God exists.

It appears from the logical argument the evidence for objective morality is higher than the evidence for God and, we can at best only deduce from objective morality the probability of God's existence. That is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.


Of course, a god would not solve the problem that they claim it solves. Morality from God would still be a subjective opinion.

Do you think a better argument from Christians will help?
Harikrish
Posts: 39,104
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2018 12:17:03 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/4/2018 8:22:19 PM, 12_13 wrote:
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute?

The problem seems to be that the evidence is so overwhelming that it makes some people blind. Or perhaps some people just don"t want to see. Luckily, the point in Bible is not that people believe God exists, but that people would understand what is good and right and want that what is good, because they understand it is good.

So the Christian argument is about establishing morality as objective.But that is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.
Harikrish
Posts: 39,104
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2018 12:28:10 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/4/2018 9:19:41 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

P1. God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

P2. Objective moral values do exist.

P3. Therefore, God exists.

It appears from the logical argument the evidence for objective morality is higher than the evidence for God and, we can at best only deduce from objective morality the probability of God's existence. That is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.

Would a virulent racist know what was objectively moral?

Are you suggesting black African negroids would know what was objectively moral because it was beaten into them during their 1,700 years of African slavery?

President Trump only called all African countries shithole countries. Christians feel vindicated for their role in African slavery because before Trump they were already convinced all Africans were shitholes and treated Africans like shithole slaves.
Even Africans were convinced they were shitholes and became Christians which strengthened their conviction.

From African slaves to African shitholes. Did Africans need the bible to make that transition?
WoeJ
Posts: 1,339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2018 2:34:57 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2018 12:12:20 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/4/2018 8:20:35 PM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

P1. God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

P2. Objective moral values do exist.

P3. Therefore, God exists.

It appears from the logical argument the evidence for objective morality is higher than the evidence for God and, we can at best only deduce from objective morality the probability of God's existence. That is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.


Of course, a god would not solve the problem that they claim it solves. Morality from God would still be a subjective opinion.

Do you think a better argument from Christians will help?

If by 'better' you mean sound -- yes. Sound arguments help.
Harikrish
Posts: 39,104
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2018 3:10:39 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2018 2:34:57 AM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/5/2018 12:12:20 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/4/2018 8:20:35 PM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

P1. God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

P2. Objective moral values do exist.

P3. Therefore, God exists.

It appears from the logical argument the evidence for objective morality is higher than the evidence for God and, we can at best only deduce from objective morality the probability of God's existence. That is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.


Of course, a god would not solve the problem that they claim it solves. Morality from God would still be a subjective opinion.

Do you think a better argument from Christians will help?


If by 'better' you mean sound -- yes. Sound arguments help.

Again why do we need better arguments if God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old? Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments
WoeJ
Posts: 1,339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2018 3:12:58 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2018 3:10:39 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/5/2018 2:34:57 AM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/5/2018 12:12:20 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/4/2018 8:20:35 PM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

P1. God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

P2. Objective moral values do exist.

P3. Therefore, God exists.

It appears from the logical argument the evidence for objective morality is higher than the evidence for God and, we can at best only deduce from objective morality the probability of God's existence. That is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.


Of course, a god would not solve the problem that they claim it solves. Morality from God would still be a subjective opinion.

Do you think a better argument from Christians will help?


If by 'better' you mean sound -- yes. Sound arguments help.

Again why do we need better arguments if God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old? Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

I don't accept your if.
Harikrish
Posts: 39,104
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2018 3:20:48 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2018 3:12:58 AM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/5/2018 3:10:39 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/5/2018 2:34:57 AM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/5/2018 12:12:20 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/4/2018 8:20:35 PM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

P1. God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

P2. Objective moral values do exist.

P3. Therefore, God exists.

It appears from the logical argument the evidence for objective morality is higher than the evidence for God and, we can at best only deduce from objective morality the probability of God's existence. That is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.


Of course, a god would not solve the problem that they claim it solves. Morality from God would still be a subjective opinion.

Do you think a better argument from Christians will help?


If by 'better' you mean sound -- yes. Sound arguments help.

Again why do we need better arguments if God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old? Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

I don't accept your if.

Then you accept that evidence for God should be abundant. So why Theists can only offer logical arguments in the absence of evidence for God's existence?
WoeJ
Posts: 1,339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2018 3:32:28 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2018 3:20:48 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/5/2018 3:12:58 AM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/5/2018 3:10:39 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/5/2018 2:34:57 AM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/5/2018 12:12:20 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/4/2018 8:20:35 PM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

P1. God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

P2. Objective moral values do exist.

P3. Therefore, God exists.

It appears from the logical argument the evidence for objective morality is higher than the evidence for God and, we can at best only deduce from objective morality the probability of God's existence. That is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.


Of course, a god would not solve the problem that they claim it solves. Morality from God would still be a subjective opinion.

Do you think a better argument from Christians will help?


If by 'better' you mean sound -- yes. Sound arguments help.

Again why do we need better arguments if God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old? Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

I don't accept your if.

Then you accept that evidence for God should be abundant.

No. What I accept is that there is insufficient evidence to rationally support the claim that one or more gods exist. What a given theist claims about his god may -- and I repeat -- may imply that there should be abundant evidence, but theists have all sorts of contorted explanations for their god's hiddeness. If a theist says that his god hides all of the evidence that should be abundance in order to save us from spiritual damage, or spins some other yarn to a similar effect, then what?

So why Theists can only offer logical arguments in the absence of evidence for God's existence?

In my opinion? Because their gods are fictions.
SecularMerlin
Posts: 7,228
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2018 4:09:40 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/4/2018 9:19:41 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

P1. God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

P2. Objective moral values do exist.

P3. Therefore, God exists.

It appears from the logical argument the evidence for objective morality is higher than the evidence for God and, we can at best only deduce from objective morality the probability of God's existence. That is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.

Would a virulent racist know what was objectively moral?

Your right, this seems way too coherent a post for harikrish, I wonder where he copy pasted from.
The only true wisdom lies in knowing that you know nothing.
-Socrates

Imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality
-Lewis Carrol
ethang5
Posts: 23,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2018 6:01:17 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2018 12:28:10 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/4/2018 9:19:41 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

P1. God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

P2. Objective moral values do exist.

P3. Therefore, God exists.

It appears from the logical argument the evidence for objective morality is higher than the evidence for God and, we can at best only deduce from objective morality the probability of God's existence. That is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.

Would a virulent racist know what was objectively moral?

Are you suggesting black African negroids would know what was objectively moral because it was beaten into them during their 1,700 years of African slavery?

President Trump only called all African countries shithole countries. Christians feel vindicated for their role in African slavery because before Trump they were already convinced all Africans were shitholes and treated Africans like shithole slaves.
Even Africans were convinced they were shitholes and became Christians which strengthened their conviction.

From African slaves to African shitholes. Did Africans need the bible to make that transition?

Thank you for answering my question.
Harikrish
Posts: 39,104
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2018 3:10:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2018 3:32:28 AM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/5/2018 3:20:48 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/5/2018 3:12:58 AM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/5/2018 3:10:39 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/5/2018 2:34:57 AM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/5/2018 12:12:20 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/4/2018 8:20:35 PM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

P1. God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

P2. Objective moral values do exist.

P3. Therefore, God exists.

It appears from the logical argument the evidence for objective morality is higher than the evidence for God and, we can at best only deduce from objective morality the probability of God's existence. That is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.


Of course, a god would not solve the problem that they claim it solves. Morality from God would still be a subjective opinion.

Do you think a better argument from Christians will help?


If by 'better' you mean sound -- yes. Sound arguments help.

Again why do we need better arguments if God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old? Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

I don't accept your if.

Then you accept that evidence for God should be abundant.

No. What I accept is that there is insufficient evidence to rationally support the claim that one or more gods exist. What a given theist claims about his god may -- and I repeat -- may imply that there should be abundant evidence, but theists have all sorts of contorted explanations for their god's hiddeness. If a theist says that his god hides all of the evidence that should be abundance in order to save us from spiritual damage, or spins some other yarn to a similar effect, then what?

So why Theists can only offer logical arguments in the absence of evidence for God's existence?

In my opinion? Because their gods are fictions.

It seems like we are on the same page. Welcome to DDO.
Harikrish
Posts: 39,104
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2018 3:28:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2018 4:09:40 AM, SecularMerlin wrote:
At 3/4/2018 9:19:41 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

P1. God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

P2. Objective moral values do exist.

P3. Therefore, God exists.

It appears from the logical argument the evidence for objective morality is higher than the evidence for God and, we can at best only deduce from objective morality the probability of God's existence. That is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.

Would a virulent racist know what was objectively moral?

Your right, this seems way too coherent a post for harikrish, I wonder where he copy pasted from.

The objective morality argument was made famous by Willian Lane Craig in several of his Theological debates. The idea that Christians reduced God to a logical argument is simply from observing the same approach Christians take when they present their argument for the evidence of God's existence. The presentation is uniquely Harikrish's provocative, scholarly and artfully articulate style.

You are capable of a cerebral reaction, not all about you are intensely anally orgasmic.
Thank you for complimenting Harikrish's textual criticism.
Harikrish
Posts: 39,104
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2018 3:37:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2018 6:01:17 AM, ethang5 wrote:
At 3/5/2018 12:28:10 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/4/2018 9:19:41 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

P1. God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

P2. Objective moral values do exist.

P3. Therefore, God exists.

It appears from the logical argument the evidence for objective morality is higher than the evidence for God and, we can at best only deduce from objective morality the probability of God's existence. That is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.

Would a virulent racist know what was objectively moral?

Are you suggesting black African negroids would know what was objectively moral because it was beaten into them during their 1,700 years of African slavery?

President Trump only called all African countries shithole countries. Christians feel vindicated for their role in African slavery because before Trump they were already convinced all Africans were shitholes and treated Africans like shithole slaves.
Even Africans were convinced they were shitholes and became Christians which strengthened their conviction.

From African slaves to African shitholes. Did Africans need the bible to make that transition?

Thank you for answering my question.

You are most welcome Ethang5. I am glad your convictions have strengthened along with your faith. Christians reduced Africans to a logical conclusion by agreeing with Trump's All African countries are shithole countries. Even Africans were convinced they were shitholes and became Christians which strengthened their conviction. How often do you see such a win win situation?
ethang5
Posts: 23,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2018 6:52:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2018 5:29:36 PM, desmac wrote:
Jolly Jelhune

Jelhune is the day one most needs to be jolly, if one is a working stiff.

You went Gaelic, we thought you were dry, and then you went Gaelic again, but with a new nugget!

I hear a few of those languages in movies and TV shows have complete lexicon ( Clingon, dothraki, elvish) if you can work some in, I'll try to figure what they say and what world it comes from.

That's how sure I am that you're out!
Harikrish
Posts: 39,104
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2018 7:24:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

P1. God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

P2. Objective moral values do exist.

P3. Therefore, God exists.

It appears from the logical argument the evidence for objective morality is higher than the evidence for God and, we can at best only deduce from objective morality the probability of God's existence. That is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.

Two thirds of the earth is covered with water. There is no need to logically argue about the presence of water because the evidence is so overwhelming. But God's presence should be even more overwhelming, he supposedly created everything and he is omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient. Yet his absence is so conspicuous that theists can only offer logical arguments to prove God's existence. Where is the logic in their logical arguments?
12_13
Posts: 2,575
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2018 8:04:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2018 12:17:03 AM, Harikrish wrote:
So the Christian argument is about establishing morality as objective.But that is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.

Bible speaks about righteousness, so it is reasonable, if disciples of Jesus ("Christians") do also the same.

These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Mat. 25:46
Harikrish
Posts: 39,104
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2018 9:06:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2018 8:04:54 PM, 12_13 wrote:
At 3/5/2018 12:17:03 AM, Harikrish wrote:
So the Christian argument is about establishing morality as objective.But that is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.

Bible speaks about righteousness, so it is reasonable, if disciples of Jesus ("Christians") do also the same.

These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Mat. 25:46

But the bible also speaks of God as being omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient and how he parted the Red Sea and sent plagues against the enemies of tbe Jews. Yet he allowed the Romans to crucify Jesus, destroy the temple and sanctuary and slaughter the very people Jesus was sent to save. 6 million more Jews died in the Holocaust.
If that is evidence of God then he is potrayed as a bumbling genocidal lunatic.
12_13
Posts: 2,575
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2018 9:03:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/5/2018 9:06:01 PM, Harikrish wrote:
...Yet he allowed the Romans to crucify Jesus, destroy the temple and sanctuary and slaughter the very people Jesus was sent to save. 6 million more Jews died in the Holocaust.

Doesn"t all people die? In Biblical point of view this first death is just meant to be a short lesson about good and evil and the true life is with God. If person dies here, it doesn"t mean he is not saved. The goal has never been to save this first death, all though I understand all evildoers love this, because this is their chance to do evil that is not allowed to enter the eternal life.
Geogeer
Posts: 6,004
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2018 11:22:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/4/2018 8:20:35 PM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

P1. God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

P2. Objective moral values do exist.

P3. Therefore, God exists.

It appears from the logical argument the evidence for objective morality is higher than the evidence for God and, we can at best only deduce from objective morality the probability of God's existence. That is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.


Of course, a god would not solve the problem that they claim it solves. Morality from God would still be a subjective opinion.

In what sense can a perfect eternal being's will be a subjective opinion? An opinion is based on limited facts. Having all the facts makes something either a true or a false statement.
WoeJ
Posts: 1,339
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2018 11:35:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2018 11:22:16 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 3/4/2018 8:20:35 PM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

P1. God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

P2. Objective moral values do exist.

P3. Therefore, God exists.

It appears from the logical argument the evidence for objective morality is higher than the evidence for God and, we can at best only deduce from objective morality the probability of God's existence. That is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.


Of course, a god would not solve the problem that they claim it solves. Morality from God would still be a subjective opinion.

In what sense can a perfect eternal being's will be a subjective opinion? An opinion is based on limited facts. Having all the facts makes something either a true or a false statement.

An opinion about what is good is not simply based on facts. It is also based upon what one values and what one wishes as a desired outcome. One's desires and values are a subjective component of one's will as a thinking, moral agent. Without such a subjective inner life, one is merely an object.
Geogeer
Posts: 6,004
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2018 11:46:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 3/6/2018 11:35:35 PM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/6/2018 11:22:16 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 3/4/2018 8:20:35 PM, WoeJ wrote:
At 3/4/2018 7:56:42 PM, Harikrish wrote:
If God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and the universe is 14 billion years old. Why are we still trying to prove logically that God exists. P1, P2, P3 etc when evidence of God's should be so overwhelming that it would be impossible to ignore or refute? Yet all we get from Theists is the same logical arguments

P1. God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.

P2. Objective moral values do exist.

P3. Therefore, God exists.

It appears from the logical argument the evidence for objective morality is higher than the evidence for God and, we can at best only deduce from objective morality the probability of God's existence. That is how the Christians have reduced God to an absurd logical argument by appealing to the atheists to accept morality as being objective.


Of course, a god would not solve the problem that they claim it solves. Morality from God would still be a subjective opinion.

In what sense can a perfect eternal being's will be a subjective opinion? An opinion is based on limited facts. Having all the facts makes something either a true or a false statement.

An opinion about what is good is not simply based on facts. It is also based upon what one values and what one wishes as a desired outcome. One's desires and values are a subjective component of one's will as a thinking, moral agent. Without such a subjective inner life, one is merely an object.

Yet God designed you with a purpose through a perfect and unchanging will. Thus actions that are in alignment with that will are good and those contrary are evil.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.