The proof of God
Current time: 10-25-2014, 02:26 AM
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
Author: arizona_logan
Last Post: eye2i2hear
Replies: 45
Views: 11122

Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The proof of God
01-27-2012, 11:09 PM
Post: #1
The proof of God
The proof of the Christian Worldview is that without it you couldn’t prove anything. How we understand and see the world is based upon our worldview. Our worldview consist on a network of presuppositions which are not tested by natural science and is by which all experience is related and interpreted.

Presuppositions are our most basic beliefs. They are the precondition of our intelligence. If our experience is to be meaningful certain things must be true. Our presumptions about the nature of reality, knowledge, and morality provide the preconditions for choosing what problems are and giving us a method to resolving them. They decide how we will interpret everything, including evidence. We must remember we all have these whether we know or acknowledge them. We can have Cancer all the mean time not knowing it or we can have cancer and at the same time deny it.
For each individual there must be an ultimate standard of reasoning. Without a correct worldview you couldn’t prove anything. It would be “turtles all the way down” or thought on thought never coming to a conclusion. Since our ultimate standard/proof is ultimate we cannot appeal to anything outside of our ultimate standard to prove it or it wouldn’t be the ultimate standard would it? Our ultimate proof must prove itself; it is self attesting by its nature. It must be presupposed in order to be proved. In the end, the end of the line must prove it is the end of the line so to speak.

Since we all have an ultimate standard then the question is which one accounts for the things we take for granted. Which one provides the preconditions of intelligibility? Which one provides the foundation for the laws of logic? Without universal absolute laws of logic we could not argue or know anything. Same holds true for universal absolute morality. You must say we should be logical. Saying we “should” or we “ought” to do something is a moral statement. The third I’ll touch on is the uniformity of nature or induction. This is that we believe things in the universe behave in a consist matter. If you get burnt by fire you don’t believe that only the one instance is painful but would conclude sticking your hand is any similar fire in similar instances is painful. Without the uniformity of nature science would be impossible and our experience in reality meaningless.

It must also be noted that since no other worldview makes sense out of logic, science and morality other than the Christians, then to raise an argument against the existence of the Biblical God you must presuppose the existence of the Biblical God. That is to say all arguments against God are self refuting. That fact that you able to make argument at all proves your wrong.

The Christian has an explanation to these things. God created man in his image. God is logical and we are to reflect his character. Logic is the way God thinks. That which is good is that which conforms to God’s Character. He is Sovereign of the universe and he created us. God upholds the universe in a consist matter and says so in his word. All this makes sense in the Christian framework.

In conclusion, all ultimate standards are circular in nature, but only the Christian view adds information making it non vicious. One couldn’t prove laws of logic without using the laws of logic. We presuppose God existence before we prove God’s existence. Unaided reason cannot prove anything. We cannot come to anything neutrally or objectively. It’s not simply looking at the evidence and deciding. It’s really not that at all. Only with God can we make sense out of anything. The preconditions of intelligibility are provided. The proof of the existence of God is that without Him we couldn’t prove anything.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-28-2012, 04:51 AM
Post: #2
RE: The proof of God
I wonder what Indian, Chinese and other "non-Christian" philosophers have been doing all this time?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-28-2012, 05:09 AM
Post: #3
RE: The proof of God
Define the word "create".

The entire argument hinges on that definition.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-28-2012, 07:52 AM
Post: #4
RE: The proof of God
(01-27-2012 11:09 PM)arizona_logan Wrote:  The proof of the Christian Worldview is that without it...

OMG!!! What a wonderful post! Perhaps you could attempt to learn how to write coherently before trying to refute logic. (Oh. Wait. Maybe the two are connected! Confused )

I'm just sayin'.

- NonE

- NonE .).

"I just don't understand how this happens." Undecided
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-28-2012, 10:32 AM (This post was last modified: 01-28-2012 10:36 AM by WorBlux.)
Post: #5
RE: The proof of God
The philosophy of the medieval church from the time of Aquinas to Luther was dominated by the works of Aristotle, who was referred to simply as "The Philsosopher." The key element of which was the assertion of a real distinction between essence and existence. (And not the existence of the biblical god, for which Aquinas admitted was entirely a matter of faith and revalation rather than reason and logic.)

The western worldview is simply not synonymous with the christian one, and it took over a millennium for the former to be fully integrated into the later.

My pgp key ID:
0x3E4258F8382DE6D0
available at subkeys.pgp.net (and others)
key fingerprint:
2F0C 4109 C8C3 B8BE E0B9 84DF 3E42 58F8 382D E6D0
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-28-2012, 12:10 PM
Post: #6
RE: The proof of God
(01-28-2012 04:51 AM)Jonathanr Wrote:  I wonder what Indian, Chinese and other "non-Christian" philosophers have been doing all this time?
Did you have an argument to present?

(01-28-2012 05:09 AM)boyntonstu Wrote:  Define the word "create".

The entire argument hinges on that definition.

I disagree with you that the entire argument hinges on that definition. An argument wouldn't make sense unless you presuppose logic, morality, and uniformity of nature.

(01-28-2012 07:52 AM)NonEntity Wrote:  
(01-27-2012 11:09 PM)arizona_logan Wrote:  The proof of the Christian Worldview is that without it...

OMG!!! What a wonderful post! Perhaps you could attempt to learn how to write coherently before trying to refute logic. (Oh. Wait. Maybe the two are connected! Confused )

I'm just sayin'.

- NonE

That is an ad hominem attack. It is an logical fallacy and my argument stands undisputed.

(01-28-2012 10:32 AM)WorBlux Wrote:  The philosophy of the medieval church from the time of Aquinas to Luther was dominated by the works of Aristotle, who was referred to simply as "The Philsosopher." The key element of which was the assertion of a real distinction between essence and existence. (And not the existence of the biblical god, for which Aquinas admitted was entirely a matter of faith and revalation rather than reason and logic.)

The western worldview is simply not synonymous with the christian one, and it took over a millennium for the former to be fully integrated into the later.

I don't see how this has to do with my post. If you want to debate you will have to do it off the things i say and not others.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-28-2012, 01:11 PM
Post: #7
RE: The proof of God
(01-28-2012 12:10 PM)arizona_logan Wrote:  
(01-28-2012 07:52 AM)NonEntity Wrote:  
(01-27-2012 11:09 PM)arizona_logan Wrote:  The proof of the Christian Worldview is that without it...

OMG!!! What a wonderful post! Perhaps you could attempt to learn how to write coherently before trying to refute logic. (Oh. Wait. Maybe the two are connected! Confused )

I'm just sayin'.

- NonE

That is an ad hominem attack. It is an logical fallacy and my argument stands undisputed.

Well, I must say that it is nasty, and I should probably be ashamed for that, but it is not an ad hominem as it deals directly with the fact that your "argument" is completely incoherent and not even expressed in language that is capable of being parsed. You are claiming to use logic to prove that logic doesn't work. WTF??? If you want to be an idiot, that's fine, but don't complain when you advertise it.

- NonE

- NonE .).

"I just don't understand how this happens." Undecided
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-28-2012, 01:24 PM
Post: #8
RE: The proof of God
(01-28-2012 12:10 PM)arizona_logan Wrote:  
(01-28-2012 10:32 AM)WorBlux Wrote:  The philosophy of the medieval church from the time of Aquinas to Luther was dominated by the works of Aristotle, who was referred to simply as "The Philsosopher." The key element of which was the assertion of a real distinction between essence and existence. (And not the existence of the biblical god, for which Aquinas admitted was entirely a matter of faith and revalation rather than reason and logic.)

The western worldview is simply not synonymous with the christian one, and it took over a millennium for the former to be fully integrated into the later.

I don't see how this has to do with my post. If you want to debate you will have to do it off the things i say and not others.

Your failure on the first matter makes me reluctant to continue in the second. Consult the fourth paragraph of your original post and let me know if your eyes are opened.

My pgp key ID:
0x3E4258F8382DE6D0
available at subkeys.pgp.net (and others)
key fingerprint:
2F0C 4109 C8C3 B8BE E0B9 84DF 3E42 58F8 382D E6D0
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-28-2012, 01:34 PM (This post was last modified: 01-28-2012 01:34 PM by arizona_logan.)
Post: #9
RE: The proof of God
(01-28-2012 01:11 PM)NonEntity Wrote:  
(01-28-2012 12:10 PM)arizona_logan Wrote:  
(01-28-2012 07:52 AM)NonEntity Wrote:  
(01-27-2012 11:09 PM)arizona_logan Wrote:  The proof of the Christian Worldview is that without it...

OMG!!! What a wonderful post! Perhaps you could attempt to learn how to write coherently before trying to refute logic. (Oh. Wait. Maybe the two are connected! Confused )

I'm just sayin'.

- NonE

That is an ad hominem attack. It is an logical fallacy and my argument stands undisputed.

Well, I must say that it is nasty, and I should probably be ashamed for that, but it is not an ad hominem as it deals directly with the fact that your "argument" is completely incoherent and not even expressed in language that is capable of being parsed. You are claiming to use logic to prove that logic doesn't work. WTF??? If you want to be an idiot, that's fine, but don't complain when you advertise it.

- NonE

(01-28-2012 01:24 PM)WorBlux Wrote:  
(01-28-2012 12:10 PM)arizona_logan Wrote:  
(01-28-2012 10:32 AM)WorBlux Wrote:  The philosophy of the medieval church from the time of Aquinas to Luther was dominated by the works of Aristotle, who was referred to simply as "The Philsosopher." The key element of which was the assertion of a real distinction between essence and existence. (And not the existence of the biblical god, for which Aquinas admitted was entirely a matter of faith and revalation rather than reason and logic.)

The western worldview is simply not synonymous with the christian one, and it took over a millennium for the former to be fully integrated into the later.

I don't see how this has to do with my post. If you want to debate you will have to do it off the things i say and not others.

Your failure on the first matter makes me reluctant to continue in the second. Consult the fourth paragraph of your original post and let me know if your eyes are opened.


This response is to the two of you.
I think you are misunderstanding what I am saying.
I am not trying to disprove logic, no not at all.
I am also not saying that non Christians don't use logic.

What I am saying is in any other worldview apart from the Christian logic does not make sense.
Logic is the very way God thinks. He has written it on our hearts.
My question to you two and to anybody reading this is how in an atheistic worldview can you account for logic? In other words why do we have it and where does it come from? What is it's foundation? This also holds true to morality and the uniformity of nature.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-28-2012, 03:39 PM
Post: #10
RE: The proof of God
"Speaking" of logic...

[Image: 25841-epicurus.jpg]

As might be expected, a quote so startlingly obvious would be put on t-shirts. http://www.cafepress.com/+epicurus_quote...t,75474445
[Image: epicurus_quote_tshirt.jpg?color=Military...;width=600]

It's dangerous to be right when the government is wrong; similar may apply here.




--

The thought of how far the human race would have advanced absent initiatory force
staggers the imagination.

THE POINT: Unlike the government thief, a common thief doesn't claim his "craft" is honest.
Lawyer-like dishonesty a point: The common thief is honest when he tells you he's robbing you.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-28-2012, 03:42 PM
Post: #11
RE: The proof of God
What is evil in an atheistic world? Would you not need a standard of goodness? What constitutes goodness?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-28-2012, 03:54 PM
Post: #12
RE: The proof of God
I'll keep my comment brief, as I have no stake (or steak) in this debate. You're in for a large amount of pointless bickering from this point forward, Logan. You have engaged a group of people who may not believe in initiating force, but will gang up on you and vehemently bash your figurative brains in. And for what? Because your statements do not mesh with their own fucked-up, shattered view of the world.


Welcome to this beta test of a voluntary society, where you're free to disagree, but you'll be ridiculed and insulted if you do.


-NonE-Prime (slowly backing away from here...) Undecided

Why is it a penny for your thoughts but you have to throw in your two cents? Somebody's making a penny here....
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-28-2012, 04:23 PM
Post: #13
RE: The proof of God
(01-28-2012 03:54 PM)Kel Wrote:  You have engaged a group of people who may not believe in initiating force, but will gang up on you and vehemently bash your figurative brains in. And for what? Because your statements do not mesh with their own fucked-up, shattered view of the world.


Welcome to this beta test of a voluntary society, where you're free to disagree, but you'll be ridiculed and insulted if you do.


-NonE-Prime (slowly backing away from here...) Undecided


Dude, I did not come forth and try and force my beliefs down anyone else's throat. Logan came in with incoherent and illogical assertions and then gets upset that we don't accept them all. I think perhaps the same applies to you. I'm not asking you to believe what I do. If I were I would present logical ideas and try to see if I could converse with you regarding points which don't line up.

When someone comes along claiming they have the right to control you and pass laws and cage you for their beliefs, are you not supposed to laugh in their face and ask for proof of these claims they make? Why is this god thing different that the state thing?

Believers in religion, of ANY sort, are generally dishonest hypocrites. THAT is the issue, not the facts of the matter. I have a lot of beliefs which I can't prove. All I can so is to present them and try to show you how I've come to believe them. When I start to shove them down your throat is when I've crossed the line.


I have only one rule: Is it voluntary?

I don't give a good god damn WHAT you want to believe as long as you are polite and honest in your approach.

Do you see me demanding you to believe in anything?

- NonE

- NonE .).

"I just don't understand how this happens." Undecided
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-28-2012, 04:49 PM
Post: #14
RE: The proof of God
(01-28-2012 04:23 PM)NonEntity Wrote:  I have a lot of beliefs which I can't prove. All I can so is to present them and try to show you how I've come to believe them.

You could also try to convert your beliefs into "knowns." Have you done this with your beliefs in materialism?

He's noble enough to know what's right
But weak enough not to choose it
He's wise enough to win the world
But fool enough to lose it
He's a New World man - Rush
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-28-2012, 05:14 PM (This post was last modified: 01-28-2012 05:41 PM by NonEntity.)
Post: #15
RE: The proof of God
(01-28-2012 04:49 PM)Dionysus Wrote:  
(01-28-2012 04:23 PM)NonEntity Wrote:  I have a lot of beliefs which I can't prove. All I can so is to present them and try to show you how I've come to believe them.

You could also try to convert your beliefs into "knowns." Have you done this with your beliefs in materialism?

I have no idea what you mean by this question. I will point out that I think the scientific method is sensible and I tend to always be open to new data and theories for examination. (Which does NOT mean that you can throw any idiotic idea at me and expect me to converse with you on it for days or even seconds. )

So if you expect me to claim that I "know" there is no god, I can't do that, but all evidence and logic points away from that conclusion and I've not seen anything yet that even begins to alter that current belief.

- NonE

{addendum} Example: I used to "know" that I was a U.S. citizen. Marc has shown me that I'm most likely NOT that particular "known" thing. Now that is probably something that almost anyone you can find will claim to "know," doncha think? Hubris is a costly habit.

As for "materialism," I have no idea what you mean by that. I do think fast cars are cool, but I don't own any. But I also believe that it's probably the case that "matter" is simply an arrangement of energy at it's very core. If that is so then, technically, there is no "material." Extraordinarily complex interactions of swirling bunches of energy seems highly likely as to what we and all of everything is. (Including ideas, when you come right down to it. Religion ((statism and godism)) is just another tsunami sweeping across the flatlands, destroying most everything in it's path.)

- NonE .).

"I just don't understand how this happens." Undecided
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)