Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Religious Issues' started by Kingarthurhk, Apr 7, 2012.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BT_AezDnj-I"]Does God Exist? - YouTube[/ame]
Another video without a hint of anything an objective person would find convincing.
If it can’t be expressed mathematically, it’s just your opinion.
So, you didn't watch it then?
I made it through the first 11 minutes and didn't see any evidence... only false assumptions. Wikipedia covers it better:
Which parts of this video, in your mind, provide the most compelling evidence?
I think all of it makes a sound argument for the Existance of God. It deals with the Teleological, Moral, and logical arguments. Very well thought out, and well done for about 27 minutes of video.
So, you didn't get very far at all before giving up and looking at the arguments of Dawkins, etc.
Follow the advice of Animal Mother and give us the single best argument and we will start from there. There are a thousand smokescreens that you can put up, so let's not waste time on trivia.
Thinking of proofs of God, I have noticed that none of the mainstream religions seem to offer a proof of God on their church's main web site. I suspect there is good reason for that.
Frankly, there is no point in discussing material with you that you have not taken the time to view. If you think it is a complete waste of time, then I guess this thread isn't for you.
It is a complete waste of time if you can't even pick a best argument. I'm not going to let someone get away with weaseling out of an argument by shifting to another, so I just take them one at a time. Give it your best shot and we'll see if it's even worth going further.
There is no argument, if you are not going to argue from the OP. The weaseling is not mine. View the material, and then discuss what you have issues with and we will proceed. Beyond that, we really don't have anything more to discuss, as I mentioned in the previous post.
Do the homework, then come with the argument. It is only reasonable.
The guy in the video, Randy Ruggles, is a salesman.
I sat listened to the video as I was cooking, and I'm not buying what he's trying to sell.
Even he admits that "there is some measure of faith involved" @ 3:40.
Tell me which of his multiple arguments you would like to start with. Give me the starting time on the video so I can make sure we are on the same topic and I have absorbed every word of that particular argument.
Just as there must be faith for asserting Atheism. You cannot prove Atheism to be true.
Press play. When it ends, you will have seen all the arguments. The entire video adresses pretty much all of them.
The video's whole premise revolves on faith. That's hardly a compelling argument.
BTW, isn't the burden of proof on someone who claims that something does, in fact, exist, not the other way around?
I've taken the time to view it, and have been through all these arguments in the past, and it's all the same repetitive stuff that's been extensively shown incorrect many times in the past. Including in the link Guss provided.
I will admit it's odd to hear the speaker invoke Occam's razor in defense of an argument for the existence of the supernatural.
Indeed. Occam argues for simplicity. There is no need to inject a god where it isn't needed.
If any of those arguments can be shown to be lacking, will it change your faith in God?