You cannot find any weaknesses in me so it is useless to try, and your prejudice doesn’t help you either.
God didn’t come from nothing, He has always been there.
The law of the conservation of energy states that in material reality energy cannot be created or destroyed.
The ‘nonmaterial spirit’ is outside of material reality and created the rules for material reality, the rules of material reality are not transferable to Him.
He transcends materiality and is not materiality.
To say otherwise would be confusing Him with His creation.
It is intersting that energy cannot be created or destroyed by humans.
This is clearly going absolutely nowhere and there are only two conlusions I can draw from it. The first is that you are being wilfully obtuse. I don’t think I should say what the second one is.
Feel free I can take it.
Unity i see no proof that God exists, i see no proof of the validity of your claims.
If you’re unwilligng to defend your claims in the interest of meaningful communication, why bother making threads?
I’m not sure that I can, however.
There is no need for defence when there has been no attack.
I attack your position on the gorunds that there is no reason to believe what you say is true. I am asserting you have no position.
If i told you that i thought god was a sadistic jerk, that would just as likely as you telling me he’s something different.
I have not attacked, i have asked for you to show me your defenses, and you have refused.
perhaps you’re bluffing?
Belief in God is a matter of faith. Any attept to prove Gods existance implies a lack of faith. Subjecting your faith to scientific inquerry is a doubting Thomas. Blessed are those who believe without seeing.
Attacking my faith will get you nowhere.
The debate was whether or not the forces of social evolution were supernatural, therefore it is entirely natural that the conditions of the debate be defined for the debate to continue.
To accept that that the forces of evolution are supernatural, clearly it has to be accepted first that God exists.
I’m sure you noticed but most people didn’t get past this stage.
Your personal judgement is wrong as are all personal judgements.
My religion states that religion and science go hand in hand.
I know more about my religion and my faith than you do.
You know more about your own faults than I do, and that is why I won’t return the judgement.
This is not a thread aout social forces, this is a thread about emotional attatchements.
You have an interesting perspective.
For the logical proof of the existence of God go here and read my first post:
Ahh, the clasic argument from design for the existance of God, based on the premise that anything that exibits complexity, order, and design must be the result of purposeful creation and could not have come into being simply of its own volition. The argument usualy takes the form of a catalogue of natures marvels, accompanied by expressions of personal increduality at the thought that such intricacy and coherance could have been the result of mere chance. Statistical arguments are frequently employed to lend spurieous weight to such incredulity.
And the argument from personal incredulity; Its just a refusal to consider any view that conflicts with an entrenched position. Another characteristic of an argument from personal incredulity is a heavy reliance on authority, tradition and precedent.
Once you know the rules of formal logic you can manipulate them to suit your own position of authority.
… blah blah blah…
The above link I have posted is absolutely infallible.
The logic is perfect.
Sometimes I wonder why I even bother…
Once you know the rules of formal logic you’ll accept the the logic of the link, and realise it is Authoritative for a reason.
Oh by the way, I consider all views with an open mind.
Anyone who actually knows me knows this is true.
Unity1,
I respect your logic and your arguments are strong for the existance of a creator.
Good job. Keep up the good work.
I have an open mind too. But it is just philosophy to me Im not defending a faith. Ill tell you what, Ill argue the design argument tomarrow.
spyder
Nice post.
Evolution occurs, everyone who is scientific agrees. The question is, how it occurs and thats where everyone parts company.