Does God Suffer From Vanity?

ZZZ,

“On past form, I not optimistic. Doubtless you'll give a fatuous retort .””

You’re consistent and therefore, predictable.

On all questions you are evasive: how do we measure the intangible? Your reply: "How tangible is love". Your response to a question is always an irrelevant question. If it was relevant, we may the have the beginnings of dialectic (but then you would really be in shit street, wouldn’t you).

“Belief is not at all irrational, it is the component we use to …live daily life”. We conduct our lives on rational/logical expectations. To use your example of driving, if I put the gear into reverse, it is a rational expectation that it will not go forward. If I travel to work in the morning by the usual route, it is a rational assumption that my place of work will be in the same place as previously.

“Suspension of reason …does not necessarily result in false conclusions” What kind of conclusions do result?
You evade the question by an irrelevant reference to aesthetics. What conclusions can be made?

I agree there is a difference between the reasonable and pure rationality. We can only make decisions based on the information and knowledge we have, which may be incomplete. However, even decisions based on incomplete knowledge should have a rational basis. I am ignorant of the expansion of gases but I can still drive my car on rational expectations.

All choice is rational. If your choices are not rational, on what basis are they made. Divine guidance?

“their are faculties that bring truth that are not intellectual or empirical in nature.” Give an example. I think I’ve made my position on the limits of empiricism clear. You are trying to justify your total lack of intellectual credibility.

“...no atheist has shown that God is a false conclusion” Again, my question: So what’s the original premise?
Your reply: “The premise is that atheists practice faith in non God much in the same way theists practice faith in God.” You present this as a syllogism – it isn’t ; your reply doesn’t logically follow.

My question: Can you give a rational basis for God’s existence?
Your (evasive) reply: “Assumption of non God is irrational.” No, you can’t give a rational basis. Your reply is nonsensical in relation to my question. We know that believers become non-believers, and non-believers become believers. Now, as a non-believer, tell me how I could believe? I am open-minded (though doubtless you will question this) - I can discern contingent from universal truths.

You keep going on about “practising” an atheistic faith. Disbelief or rejection of theism doesn’t require a conscious and deliberate effort. I don’t believe in Santa Claus, fairies, unicorns, Allah, Persephone, Woden, etc
Do I need to go through an active process of affirmation of disbelief?

“I have no need to "study" someone else's theology.” Your theology is obviously self-taught.
“More claims intellectual superiority, which is typical of the atheists...” The Church fathers which can teach you nothing, may not have made claims for themselves, but it is evident even to an atheist as myself. You have no claim to intellectual legitimacy, and lack intellectual integrity. You are intellectually barren and bankrupt.

Opponents should enjoy the cut-and-thrust of lively debate. I’m not wasting anymore time and energy on you – I’ll just pissing in the wind..

Sophistry? You can’t even aspire to mediocrity. Do you know what an epistemological anarchist is?

Grant

 

but a few posts back you said "Nothing can be created without a creator." are you giving god an exemption to your "nothing" statement?

your second statement is exactly right: "Perhaps the minds of people created him."

as far as how the first life was created science just does not know yet. the only thing we are 99% sure of is that it was not as the bible says it was.
backbone of the atheist argument for non existence of GOD is the lack of evidence.

 

You're utterly confused. "Irrational" is another word for "faith." Why are you so against faith? Are you always calculating, rationalizing every action you take? Instead of acting in faith sometimes?

There are two kinds of children who believe in Santa Claus. The first kind truly believe. Those have faith in Santa Claus and are irrational. The second kind know if they stop believing, they will stop receiving presents. So their belief is based on a very rational calculation.

Are you telling us that your religious belief is based on a calculation, rather than faith? If so, it would be the ultimate hypocricy.

 

Grant said:
"My question: Can you give a rational basis for God’s existence?
Your (evasive) reply: “Assumption of non God is irrational.” No, you can’t give a rational basis. Your reply is nonsensical in relation to my question. We know that believers become non-believers, and non-believers become believers."

The answer is romans 1, verses 19 and 20. "1:19 because that which is known of God is revealed in them, for God revealed it to them.
1:20 For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse. "


Grant also asks:
"Now, as a non-believer, tell me how I could believe? I am open-minded (though doubtless you will question this) - I can discern contingent from universal truths."

The answer is romans 10, verse 17.
"17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."

Hopes this helps.

 

Please, tell me you have more than petty personal attacks...

 

This didn't take long, the atheists are back in full attack and ridicule mode...

Predictable, very predictable...

I guess that is what the "superior" intellect" does when their faith is challenged....

 

james_bond_3rd is another word for bonehead.

"irrational" <> "faith"

"acting in faith". How does one know if they are even acting in faith without rationalizing the situation? "Well, I'm going to die of cancer, etc ... "

It isn't irrational for a child to believe in Santa Claus. Why would it be irrational for a man to believe in God? Because James_Bond_3rd "knows" god doesn't exist?

My religious beliefs are constantly evolving. Yes, I threw "evolve" in there to screw with you. The mention of an "irrational belief in god" threw me into a fit.

 

so for you the words of a 2000 year old book written by a man named paul who never even met jesus are enough to prove the existence of god?

If “faith” is a prerequisite in a belief in order to see the truth of the belief, being if there were evidence there would be no need for “faith” in any particular belief.
All supernatural beliefs require “faith” in its truth, being there is no evidence proving any particular belief.
So it must be the “faith” itself that dictates what is true.
Therefore every one of the worlds religions are true, being they all rely on the “faith” of the believer to see its truth. -Unknown

 

Grant, always remember... the troll wins by losing.

 

and atheists lose by winning.


I actually like that one!