Does God Exist? -

Lion IRC · 09-19-2015, 11:33 PM

Democracy. What a bummer.

Testycalibrated · 09-20-2015, 12:06 AM

:

I am fine with the conditions. When do you want to start? Also, admins, can I get mod powers in the debate forum to move errant posts to the peanut gallery?

You can't Mod your own debate thread.

I don't think there's really any reason not to. I just want to be able to move any non debate posts out of the thread. If it seems wrong, no problem.

Testycalibrated · 09-20-2015, 12:07 AM

:

Gods (probably) exists vs. God (probably) does not exist.

That could work if we ever find a theist that can understand probability.

I am fine with the conditions.

punkforchrist · 09-20-2015, 12:17 AM

:

Also,

:

I'll do it. First define god. We have to use an agreed upon definition.

Is god personal? Can god interact with individuals through language? Can god physically intervene in the universe?

I think this is going to be important. I'm not sure until I see your op, but just in case. Is that ok?

This might be problematic. While I'm a Christian theist, I'm only arguing for theism proper, e.g. deism. Can God interact with individuals through language? That depends on what you mean. God communicates to individuals through what has been made. However, I won't be arguing for miracles, e.g. the resurrection of Jesus. Maybe we can debate that at another time. The arguments I'm defending presuppose that God intervenes in the universe. The First Way alone necessitates that He is the source of change.

Testycalibrated · 09-20-2015, 12:32 AM

Sounds good.

woof · 09-20-2015, 12:40 AM

:

Also,

:

I'll do it. First define god. We have to use an agreed upon definition.

Is god personal? Can god interact with individuals through language? Can god physically intervene in the universe?

I think this is going to be important. I'm not sure until I see your op, but just in case. Is that ok?

This might be problematic. While I'm a Christian theist, I'm only arguing for theism proper, e.g. deism. Can God interact with individuals through language? That depends on what you mean. God communicates to individuals through what has been made. However, I won't be arguing for miracles, e.g. the resurrection of Jesus. Maybe we can debate that at another time. The arguments I'm defending presuppose that God intervenes in the universe. The First Way alone necessitates that He is the source of change.

Here is a clue if you want knowledge, and not just the ass-water like what you get from "philosophers" like Tommie Aqua-arse. Don't pre-suppose anything.
If you believe in something, try to disprove it.

punkforchrist · 09-20-2015, 12:47 AM

:

Sounds good.

Care to start on Thursday? We can take a week between posts. Does that work for you? By the way, much of my opening statement I've already stated, but not all of it. Is that okay?

punkforchrist · 09-20-2015, 12:48 AM

:

Also,

:

I'll do it. First define god. We have to use an agreed upon definition.

Is god personal? Can god interact with individuals through language? Can god physically intervene in the universe?

I think this is going to be important. I'm not sure until I see your op, but just in case. Is that ok?

This might be problematic. While I'm a Christian theist, I'm only arguing for theism proper, e.g. deism. Can God interact with individuals through language? That depends on what you mean. God communicates to individuals through what has been made. However, I won't be arguing for miracles, e.g. the resurrection of Jesus. Maybe we can debate that at another time. The arguments I'm defending presuppose that God intervenes in the universe. The First Way alone necessitates that He is the source of change.

Here is a clue if you want knowledge, and not just the ass-water like what you get from "philosophers" like Tommie Aqua-arse. Don't pre-suppose anything.
If you believe in something, try to disprove it.

It's funny that you're trying to get under my skin. Good luck.

punkforchrist · 09-20-2015, 01:04 AM

Testy, would you be okay if we changed the number of the rounds? I'm thinking:

Opening statement: 2,000 words
First rebuttal: 1,000 words
Second rebuttal: 1,000 words
Conclusion: 750 words

OHSU · 09-20-2015, 03:20 AM

There is no evidence for any god. (Evidence is a body of facts that is exclusively concordant with and thus supportive of that one conclusion over any other.)

When there is no evidence for something, there is no reason to believe in it, which is a pretty good reason not to believe in it.

woof · 09-20-2015, 04:48 AM

:

Also,

:

I'll do it. First define god. We have to use an agreed upon definition.

Is god personal? Can god interact with individuals through language? Can god physically intervene in the universe?

I think this is going to be important. I'm not sure until I see your op, but just in case. Is that ok?

This might be problematic. While I'm a Christian theist, I'm only arguing for theism proper, e.g. deism. Can God interact with individuals through language? That depends on what you mean. God communicates to individuals through what has been made. However, I won't be arguing for miracles, e.g. the resurrection of Jesus. Maybe we can debate that at another time. The arguments I'm defending presuppose that God intervenes in the universe. The First Way alone necessitates that He is the source of change.

Here is a clue if you want knowledge, and not just the ass-water like what you get from "philosophers" like Tommie Aqua-arse. Don't pre-suppose anything.
If you believe in something, try to disprove it.

It's funny that you're trying to get under my skin. Good luck.

Not trying to get under your skin, or anybody else's. I am just mentioning the rules of discourse.
Pontification is not a route to knowledge, merely self-delusion and the hope of deluding others. That is what apologists like Thomas Aquinas & Bishop Anselm did.
Any sincere debate, any sincere quest for knowledge will deliberately try to minimize assumptions, examine all available data and argument, and conduct honest testing of ideas.
God exists therefore...wank, wank, wank.....is not discourse, it is pseudo-intellectual masturbation. HTH.

Testycalibrated · 09-20-2015, 05:02 AM

:

Testy, would you be okay if we changed the number of the rounds? I'm thinking:

Opening statement: 2,000 words
First rebuttal: 1,000 words
Second rebuttal: 1,000 words
Conclusion: 750 words

Sure. I'll probably use almost all the words allowed no matter how long.

Testycalibrated · 09-20-2015, 05:06 AM

:

Sounds good.

Care to start on Thursday? We can take a week between posts. Does that work for you? By the way, much of my opening statement I've already stated, but not all of it. Is that okay?

That sounds good. I'm not sure how I will address the topic yet so go ahead and make the case you want to make. I'll address the topic on whatever terms work for you.

And, woof, aqua-arse? What are you, three?

Lion IRC · 09-20-2015, 08:52 AM

:

Also,

:

I'll do it. First define god. We have to use an agreed upon definition.

Is god personal? Can god interact with individuals through language? Can god physically intervene in the universe?

I think this is going to be important. I'm not sure until I see your op, but just in case. Is that ok?

This might be problematic. While I'm a Christian theist, I'm only arguing for theism proper, e.g. deism. Can God interact with individuals through language? That depends on what you mean. God communicates to individuals through what has been made. However, I won't be arguing for miracles, e.g. the resurrection of Jesus. Maybe we can debate that at another time. The arguments I'm defending presuppose that God intervenes in the universe. The First Way alone necessitates that He is the source of change.

Here is a clue if you want knowledge, and not just the ass-water like what you get from "philosophers" like Tommie Aqua-arse. Don't pre-suppose anything.
If you believe in something, try to disprove it.

woof! RELAX.
He is doing his opponent a favor.
Better they should both - for the sake of the argument/debate - agree in advance on some presuppositions about the nature of the divine entity being discussed. PFC is stating the bleeding obvious that it should be presupposed that if/since God exists, then evidence of same would presumably involve at least some intervention (theophany).

buttershug · 09-20-2015, 01:13 PM

:

Also,

:

I'll do it. First define god. We have to use an agreed upon definition.

Is god personal? Can god interact with individuals through language? Can god physically intervene in the universe?

I think this is going to be important. I'm not sure until I see your op, but just in case. Is that ok?

This might be problematic. While I'm a Christian theist, I'm only arguing for theism proper, e.g. deism. Can God interact with individuals through language? That depends on what you mean. God communicates to individuals through what has been made. However, I won't be arguing for miracles, e.g. the resurrection of Jesus. Maybe we can debate that at another time. The arguments I'm defending presuppose that God intervenes in the universe. The First Way alone necessitates that He is the source of change.

Here is a clue if you want knowledge, and not just the ass-water like what you get from "philosophers" like Tommie Aqua-arse. Don't pre-suppose anything.
If you believe in something, try to disprove it.

woof! RELAX.
He is doing his opponent a favor.
Better they should both - for the sake of the argument/debate - agree in advance on some presuppositions about the nature of the divine entity being discussed. PFC is stating the bleeding obvious that it should be presupposed that if/since God exists, then evidence of same would presumably involve at least some intervention (theophany).

But one can only conclude God with pre-suppositions.
If you want Truth then you don't pre-suppose.
If you want God then you must pre-suppose.

woof · 09-20-2015, 02:39 PM

:

Sounds good.

Care to start on Thursday? We can take a week between posts. Does that work for you? By the way, much of my opening statement I've already stated, but not all of it. Is that okay?

That sounds good. I'm not sure how I will address the topic yet so go ahead and make the case you want to make. I'll address the topic on whatever terms work for you.

And, woof, aqua-arse? What are you, three?

Aquinas was a murdering son-of-a-bitch who tortured and killed who knows how many "heretics", and all the while imagined himself to be some sort of saint. Catholics to this day worship him as if he was the alpha and omega of intellect and humanity. I see him as no better than Himmler. He was a butcher. He deserves no respect.

borealis · 09-20-2015, 02:45 PM

Guys I haven't messed with it ever, but isn't the Rat ring set up so that only the debating pair can post itt?

SMS · 09-20-2015, 04:52 PM

:

Also,

:

I'll do it. First define god. We have to use an agreed upon definition.

Is god personal? Can god interact with individuals through language? Can god physically intervene in the universe?

I think this is going to be important. I'm not sure until I see your op, but just in case. Is that ok?

This might be problematic. While I'm a Christian theist, I'm only arguing for theism proper, e.g. deism. Can God interact with individuals through language? That depends on what you mean. God communicates to individuals through what has been made. However, I won't be arguing for miracles, e.g. the resurrection of Jesus. Maybe we can debate that at another time. The arguments I'm defending presuppose that God intervenes in the universe. The First Way alone necessitates that He is the source of change.

Here is a clue if you want knowledge, and not just the ass-water like what you get from "philosophers" like Tommie Aqua-arse. Don't pre-suppose anything.
If you believe in something, try to disprove it.

It's funny that you're trying to get under my skin. Good luck.

Not trying to get under your skin, or anybody else's. I am just mentioning the rules of discourse.
Pontification is not a route to knowledge, merely self-delusion and the hope of deluding others. That is what apologists like Thomas Aquinas & Bishop Anselm did.
Any sincere debate, any sincere quest for knowledge will deliberately try to minimize assumptions, examine all available data and argument, and conduct honest testing of ideas.
God exists therefore...wank, wank, wank.....is not discourse, it is pseudo-intellectual masturbation. HTH.

There is no argument offered by Aquinas for the existence of God that begins with the idea that God exists and infers stuff from it.

ToThePoint · 09-20-2015, 04:56 PM

:

Guys I haven't messed with it ever, but isn't the Rat ring set up so that only the debating pair can post itt?

Yes of course, only the 2 debate participants post in the debate thread.

A separate Peanut Gallery thread is started for anyone else to chime in.

punkforchrist · 09-20-2015, 04:57 PM

It's probably best not to reply to woof if he's going to behave like that. We have to pick our battles. And, I'm sure he'll say something snarky to me next.

punkforchrist · 09-20-2015, 04:58 PM

Testy, we're starting on Thursday, right?

SMS · 09-20-2015, 05:04 PM

:

Also,

:

I'll do it. First define god. We have to use an agreed upon definition.

Is god personal? Can god interact with individuals through language? Can god physically intervene in the universe?

I think this is going to be important. I'm not sure until I see your op, but just in case. Is that ok?

This might be problematic. While I'm a Christian theist, I'm only arguing for theism proper, e.g. deism. Can God interact with individuals through language? That depends on what you mean. God communicates to individuals through what has been made. However, I won't be arguing for miracles, e.g. the resurrection of Jesus. Maybe we can debate that at another time. The arguments I'm defending presuppose that God intervenes in the universe. The First Way alone necessitates that He is the source of change.

Here is a clue if you want knowledge, and not just the ass-water like what you get from "philosophers" like Tommie Aqua-arse. Don't pre-suppose anything.
If you believe in something, try to disprove it.

woof! RELAX.
He is doing his opponent a favor.
Better they should both - for the sake of the argument/debate - agree in advance on some presuppositions about the nature of the divine entity being discussed. PFC is stating the bleeding obvious that it should be presupposed that if/since God exists, then evidence of same would presumably involve at least some intervention (theophany).

No, not exactly. PFC might have spoke unclearly here.

If this argument is the first way, then God's existence will be argued as a causal precondition for there being any change at all, that for any change, God's existence is a necessary, causal precondition for such change to exist and subsist moment from moment. Thus, from the premise that there is change, as PFC will argue it, we can deduce God's existence and some sort of causal interaction with that change. Does God "interact" with the world according to this argument? Yes, in a sense, but He is more like a flute player who blows into the flute, keeping the music going from moment to moment than interacting in it in a way like you or me. This is not to say that God couldnt interact in it in such a way, but only that the argument doesn't aim to show that.

In any case, there is no need to presume that if God exists, then he interacts with the world. It will be shown that if there is any change at all, and there is, then God is keeps that change going, which implies a sort of interaction.

punkforchrist · 09-20-2015, 08:25 PM

Right, the First Way isn't the kalam argument. This isn't about originating causation, but about sustaining causation. It's like the difference between the crew that builds a house and the foundation that sustains it.

punkforchrist · 09-20-2015, 08:30 PM

Maybe a better analogy for the First Way is a spring that keeps the gears of a watch moving. By the way, the First Way is about change in general, and not just movement from one location to another.

Lion IRC · 09-20-2015, 08:48 PM

:

Gods (probably) exists vs. God (probably) does not exist.

That could work if we ever find a theist that can understand probability.

You mean someone like Kurt Gödel or Thomas Bayes?

09-20-2015, 03:20 AM	#2563995 / #35
OHSU Senior Member : Apr 2009 : 6,265	There is no evidence for any god. (Evidence is a body of facts that is exclusively concordant with and thus supportive of that one conclusion over any other.) When there is no evidence for something, there is no reason to believe in it, which is a pretty good reason not to believe in it. __________________ I think that probably [aquatic apes] were about aquatic to the same degree as an otter. So, they would spend large amounts of time in the water but come ashore to sleep and to breed. -- Elaine Morgan

09-20-2015, 02:45 PM	#2564096 / #42
borealis cruel but fair Admin : Oct 2008 : Canada : 27,030	Guys I haven't messed with it ever, but isn't the Rat ring set up so that only the debating pair can post itt? __________________ “What is important is to spread confusion, not eliminate it.” ― Salvador Dalí

X vBulletin 3.8.6 Debug Information
Page Generation 0.23108 seconds Memory Usage 4,517KB Queries Executed 72 (?)
More Information
Template Usage: (1)SHOWTHREAD (1)ad_footer_end (1)ad_footer_start (1)ad_header_end (1)ad_header_logo (1)ad_navbar_below (1)ad_showthread_beforeqr (1)ad_showthread_firstpost (1)ad_showthread_firstpost_sig (1)ad_showthread_firstpost_start (25)add_ignore_user_to_postbit (48)bbcode_quote (1)footer (1)forumjump (1)forumrules (1)gobutton (1)header (1)headinclude (2)mysmilies_imagebit (1)navbar (3)navbar_link (1)navbar_mini (1)navbar_noticebit (55)option (1)pagenav (1)pagenav_curpage (3)pagenav_pagelink (1)pagenav_pagelinkrel (25)postbit_legacy (25)postbit_onlinestatus (25)postbit_reputation (25)postbit_wrapper (1)spacer_close (1)spacer_open (5)tagbit (1)tagbit_wrapper (11)v3arcade_award_bit (6)v3arcade_postbit_userid_popup_menu (6)v3arcade_postbit_userid_trophy Phrase Groups Available: global inlinemod postbit posting reputationlevel showthread	Included Files: ./showthread.php ./global.php ./includes/init.php ./includes/class_core.php ./includes/config.php ./includes/functions.php ./includes/class_hook.php ./includes/functions_notice.php ./mobiquo/smartbanner.php ./mobiquo/smartbanner/head.inc.php ./includes/functions_bigthree.php ./includes/class_postbit.php ./includes/class_bbcode.php ./includes/functions_reputation.php Hooks Called: init_startup cache_permissions fetch_threadinfo_query fetch_threadinfo fetch_foruminfo style_fetch cache_templates global_start parse_templates fetch_musername notices_check_start notices_noticebit global_setup_complete showthread_start showthread_getinfo forumjump showthread_post_start showthread_query_postids showthread_query bbcode_fetch_tags bbcode_create showthread_postbit_create postbit_factory postbit_display_start reputation_image postbit_imicons bbcode_parse_start fetch_userinfo_query fetch_userinfo bbcode_parse_complete_precache bbcode_parse_complete postbit_display_complete pagenav_page pagenav_complete tag_fetchbit tag_fetchbit_complete forumrules navbits navbits_complete showthread_complete
Messages:

09-19-2015, 11:33 PM	#2563902 / #26
Lion IRC Senior Member : Aug 2010 : 1,750	Democracy. What a bummer.

09-20-2015, 01:04 AM	#2563933 / #34
punkforchrist Senior Member : Jun 2009 : Texas : 103	Testy, would you be okay if we changed the number of the rounds? I'm thinking: Opening statement: 2,000 words First rebuttal: 1,000 words Second rebuttal: 1,000 words Conclusion: 750 words

09-20-2015, 04:57 PM	#2564129 / #45
punkforchrist Senior Member : Jun 2009 : Texas : 103	It's probably best not to reply to woof if he's going to behave like that. We have to pick our battles. And, I'm sure he'll say something snarky to me next.

09-20-2015, 04:58 PM	#2564131 / #46
punkforchrist Senior Member : Jun 2009 : Texas : 103	Testy, we're starting on Thursday, right?

09-20-2015, 08:25 PM	#2564168 / #48
punkforchrist Senior Member : Jun 2009 : Texas : 103	Right, the First Way isn't the kalam argument. This isn't about originating causation, but about sustaining causation. It's like the difference between the crew that builds a house and the foundation that sustains it.

09-20-2015, 08:30 PM	#2564169 / #49
punkforchrist Senior Member : Jun 2009 : Texas : 103	Maybe a better analogy for the First Way is a spring that keeps the gears of a watch moving. By the way, the First Way is about change in general, and not just movement from one location to another.