Comments on: "Proofs" of God’s existence http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/08/proofs-of-gods-existence/ Wed, 08 Oct 2008 02:54:44 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Pedro Timóteo http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/08/proofs-of-gods-existence/#comment-6321 Pedro Timóteo Tue, 09 Jan 2007 12:34:26 +0000 http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/08/proofs-of-gods-existence/#comment-6321 One more: <b>511. ARGUMENT FROM RESPECT</b> (1) You have to respect my right to believe that God exists. (2) You also have to respect my right to believe that I don't have to respect your right to believe that God doesn't exist. (3) Therefore, God exists. One more:

511. ARGUMENT FROM RESPECT
(1) You have to respect my right to believe that God exists.
(2) You also have to respect my right to believe that I don’t have to respect your right to believe that God doesn’t exist.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

]]> By: Pedro Timóteo http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/08/proofs-of-gods-existence/#comment-6310 Pedro Timóteo Tue, 09 Jan 2007 11:43:39 +0000 http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/08/proofs-of-gods-existence/#comment-6310 Not "just labels". If what you come up with already has a name, that name will be used, thank you very much. :) I wasn't "trying to answer the question of God's existance" (anyone who believes in it is, in my opinion, necessarily guilty of some kind of <i>wishful thinking</i> - whether it's a "personal" god or not), I was just, in this particular case, posting a link to a list I found hilarious, which condenses all the usual theists' arguments. Theists DO use those arguments - just check out the comments on this blog, and others. And, yet, they don't make sense, are self-contradictory, show terrible ignorance about science, are logically wrong, appeal to emotions and to ignorance, are childish, and so on. <b>That's</b> what this post was about. I wasn't trying to "prove that God doesn't exist"; it's something that can't be proved, though I'm convinced that, with zero evidence for his existence, it's - as I said in the beginning - wishful thinking to believe. Not “just labels”. If what you come up with already has a name, that name will be used, thank you very much. :)

I wasn’t “trying to answer the question of God’s existance” (anyone who believes in it is, in my opinion, necessarily guilty of some kind of wishful thinking - whether it’s a “personal” god or not), I was just, in this particular case, posting a link to a list I found hilarious, which condenses all the usual theists’ arguments. Theists DO use those arguments - just check out the comments on this blog, and others. And, yet, they don’t make sense, are self-contradictory, show terrible ignorance about science, are logically wrong, appeal to emotions and to ignorance, are childish, and so on. That’s what this post was about. I wasn’t trying to “prove that God doesn’t exist”; it’s something that can’t be proved, though I’m convinced that, with zero evidence for his existence, it’s - as I said in the beginning - wishful thinking to believe.

]]> By: Kren http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/08/proofs-of-gods-existence/#comment-6309 Kren Tue, 09 Jan 2007 11:43:07 +0000 http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/08/proofs-of-gods-existence/#comment-6309 I like 79. It's closest to me. I like 79. It’s closest to me.

]]> By: A Forgetful God http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/08/proofs-of-gods-existence/#comment-6282 A Forgetful God Tue, 09 Jan 2007 01:34:14 +0000 http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/08/proofs-of-gods-existence/#comment-6282 panthiesm, christianity, buddhism....these are just labels. Are we trying to answer the question of God's existence or are we simply trying to quibble over who has the better "theory". And for your information, it is not "pantheism"...it is my thoughts and insights. You can relate theories all you like, but it isn't until you look at your OWN conclusions that you will understand anything. Otherwise you're just regurgitating other peoples theories in the hopes of sounding intelligent. Sincerely, A Forgetful God panthiesm, christianity, buddhism….these are just labels. Are we trying to answer the question of God’s existence or are we simply trying to quibble over who has the better “theory”. And for your information, it is not “pantheism”…it is my thoughts and insights. You can relate theories all you like, but it isn’t until you look at your OWN conclusions that you will understand anything. Otherwise you’re just regurgitating other peoples theories in the hopes of sounding intelligent.

Sincerely,

A Forgetful God

]]> By: Pedro Timóteo http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/08/proofs-of-gods-existence/#comment-6256 Pedro Timóteo Mon, 08 Jan 2007 19:15:58 +0000 http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/08/proofs-of-gods-existence/#comment-6256 That's <a href="http://www.wayofthemind.org/2006/12/28/deism-and-pantheism/" rel="nofollow">pantheism</a>, which is a completely different subject, and is, IMO, unrelated to Christianity. You may not believe in a personal god, and neither do I (personal or not, in my case), but a lot of people do - and they use arguments exactly like the ones listed. In fact, just read the comments for some of the <a href="http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/03/way-of-the-minds-10-most-popular-posts-in-2006/" rel="nofollow">most popular posts</a>, and you'll see many of those on this very blog. :) That’s pantheism, which is a completely different subject, and is, IMO, unrelated to Christianity.

You may not believe in a personal god, and neither do I (personal or not, in my case), but a lot of people do - and they use arguments exactly like the ones listed. In fact, just read the comments for some of the most popular posts, and you’ll see many of those on this very blog. :)

]]> By: A Forgetful God http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/08/proofs-of-gods-existence/#comment-6255 A Forgetful God Mon, 08 Jan 2007 19:10:49 +0000 http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/08/proofs-of-gods-existence/#comment-6255 I think we tend to get lost in our idea of what "God" is. It was never supposed to be "An old guy on a cloud", it was originally just a label for the totality of everything. The Vedics referred to it as "that" You are made of 'that', I am made of 'that', everything is made of 'that' Science calls it energy, religion calls it spirit. The fact is that "God" is, when it comes right down to it, the "thing" that everything is made from. The question "does it have a consciousness" seems slightly ridiculous. Do you have a consciousness? Obviously if You, Me, and Everything Else is made from this "one thing" then OUR consciousness IS "It's" consciousness. does this not make sense? Our will is "IT's Will"? A Forgetful God I think we tend to get lost in our idea of what “God” is. It was never supposed to be “An old guy on a cloud”, it was originally just a label for the totality of everything. The Vedics referred to it as “that”

You are made of ‘that’, I am made of ‘that’, everything is made of ‘that’

Science calls it energy, religion calls it spirit. The fact is that “God” is, when it comes right down to it, the “thing” that everything is made from. The question “does it have a consciousness” seems slightly ridiculous. Do you have a consciousness? Obviously if You, Me, and Everything Else is made from this “one thing” then OUR consciousness IS “It’s” consciousness.

does this not make sense? Our will is “IT’s Will”?

A Forgetful God

]]>