Creationism: the logic of fact and opinion

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
21

Again,

  1. I do not do evidence.
  2. I certainly do not need physical proof because I already have it.

If there is fault in it, then I probably will find it.

you are in a philosophy forum but you do not want to use philosophical terms and definitions. Instead you want to use some term and definition that people in some other field choose to use, right?

By the way, they use that most idiosyncratic term and definition because they cannot escape the contradiction in their claims here.

Now, and anyway, I noticed that the term and word ‘void’, which is what you used, was not mentioned once in those copied and pasted words.

Look, I once again never disagreed with what you were “arguing” for. I was just trying to obtain a better understanding of where you come from. you made ‘a claim’, I was just seeing if you had any actual proof for it, and/or what perspective you were coming from.

If you want to have a discussion where together ‘we’ WILL arrive a Fact that no one, scientifically, theologically, or philosophically inclined, could refute at all, then let ‘us’ have a discussion.

I already have the irrefutable proof for what ‘it’ that you want to claim here is the Truth. However, when you introduce words like ‘void’, for example, then just be prepared to be questioned for clarity, and/or challenged.

To me, the word ‘void’ refers being de-void of any thing. From which, obviously, there is no thing that could come from nothing.

1 Like
22

Some people claim that Everything began and came from either God, or a so-called big bang. Both ideas and beliefs, by the way, are as completely absurd and impossible as each other.

Everything, as One, exists always. This cannot be logically denied nor refuted.

Fir those who want the irrefutable proof for this Fact, then some of ‘you’ know where to find ‘Me’.

1 Like
23

@anew1

Void, nothingness, vacuum, or empty space all describe the same very concept. Different words, same meaning.

:clown_face:

24

@anew1

I have already stated there is no beginning or end. My preferred perception of the cosmos and universe is infinite or eternity.

Although I don’t think of God in my perception. I would say instead an all encompassing celestial energy, vibration, flow, or force that is in all things making up the basic building blocks of all reality.

:clown_face:

25

Yet, and quite remarkable, you also claim that ‘that’, which is referred to and called ‘void, nothing ess, vacuum, or empty’, is actually not void, not nothingness, not vacuumous, and not empty after all.

And they wondered why they have not yet found the Truth of things here.

If you really want to come to a publicly viewable philosophical forum and claim that those four words, which imply ‘no thing’ at all, actual mean there are things, then okay.

But, doing so is only further proving my claim that the Universe is infinite and eternal.

Which obviously contradicts some theological and scientific beliefs and claims.

1 Like
26

I already knew.

That is why I said I do not agree with what you are trying to ‘argue’ for here.

Me already knowing your view here is also why I stated I already have the irrefutable proof for your claim here.

1 Like
27

@anew1

It’s clear you didn’t read the physics image I posted at all. You really are a waste of time talking or conversing with.

I tried but you don’t seem to listen to others very well at all.

You don’t make a lot of friends criticizing everything everyone says. Word of advice.

:clown_face:

28

Once more, I have already obtained the irrefutable proof fir this irrefutable Fact.

By the way, what you say here, instead, is just what the word ‘God’ has been referring to anyway.

1 Like
29

@anew1

You sound Christian or even as one of those obscure Deists.

:clown_face:

30

Once again, ‘we’ have another prime example of another who continually BELIEVES that I am arguing AGAINST them.

Which is really hilarious considering the actual words that I choose and present forth with here. Again for all to look at and see.

That so-called “physics image” you posted only further proves what I am saying and claiming, while helping to refute some so-called “physicists” claim that the Universe began and is expanding.

1 Like
31

JUST MAYBE, who has not been ‘listening’ here is not ‘the one’ others believe it is.

1 Like
32

Noted you just said this.

33

@anew1

Maybe I am misunderstanding you, but a part of conversation or dialogue requires you to listen to others and try to understand them before you pick everything that they believe a part.

I am willing to give you the benefit of a doubt because I don’t believe you’re intentionally acting malicious. I will try to show you more patience but I would ask that you do the same in return.

:clown_face:

34

Why exactly?

Just because I use the ‘God’?

Is there any other reason that led ‘you’ to this perception?

Could it be ‘this view’ of yours why ‘you’ keep mistaking what ‘I’ am actually doing here?

1 Like
35

@anew1

No, that’s not the only reason.

You sound like an overly analytical man with a deep conviction I assume towards mental logic.

With people who believe in God under that mental criteria from my experience talking with others are usually Deists, Pantheists, or Panentheists.

:clown_face:

36

@anew1

Time will tell, I will try my best not to write you off automatically just yet.

:clown_face:

37

I can guarantee that it is more than just a ‘maybe’.

But you are not alone here.

JUST MAYBE, I have been listening and understanding far, far more than any of you here have yet realised and noticed.

Most of what I say and write here cannot be so-called “picked apart”, from the definition and meaning you are giving that term here.

And, if what I say and write can be “picked apart”, then I most certainly want it done.

you are completely and utterly misunderstanding ‘Me’ here.

I, by the way, could “pick apart” your last quoted words here regarding at least six different things, but I will, as you say, ‘show patience’.

1 Like
38

I share Truths, which I have proof for that no one could logically refute.

If, when I just ‘analyse’, you want to call ‘this’ being ‘overly analytical’, then so be it. But some could say that when one calls another as ‘being over analytical’, then this could be because the Truth of one’s beliefs or positions are becoming too close to being revealed and shown.

Also, why do you keep ‘trying to assume’ things ‘about me’ here?

This is another prime example of what I call ‘APE-thinking’. Making Assumptions on one’s own Past Experiences is what kept leading these human beings so far astray, and kept them from coming to know the Truths of things.

Also, and please do not forget, that ‘you’ are the one here believing the very thing/s that the word ‘God’ has been referring to for thousands of years now.

1 Like
39

@anew1

I am not trying to be arrogantly presumptuous, more like trying to make educated guesses on experience trying to get to know you.

You sound overly analytical to me largely because I find endless complexity to discussions to be unnecessary and inadequate. I believe simplicity is the best way to communication, simplicity is the best way to convey conversation.

I still feel we’re misunderstanding each other but that’s alright, I suppose such thing is inevitable in text on the internet.

:clown_face:

40

How do you think “your pity” ‘for me’ comes across to the readers here?