Does God exist?

i think i get what apocalypseXL is saying: see considering that the majority of adult people on earth believe in some kind of Deity. it is not just likely for anyone to dismiss that fact. so the flying spaghetti monster, fairies, santa claus, or there is a teapot orbiting around the sun or the possibility of 50/50 percent of some other argument will be canceled

it is somewhat similar to when in a court of law, you have many witnesses willing to testify positive on something, the judge will really consider the witnesses if he/she is a good judge, before making a ruling.

 

Islam is, or if not, soon will be, the most prolific religion. So would them being more prolific mean they are inherently more correct?
You did say "the opinion of the majority remains "law" until proven to the contrary", right? Or are you going to try to find a way for the things you claimed were true to not apply to things you don't actually already agree with, again?

I don't know at what point you are going to understand that saying the amount of people who believe something effects the likelihood of it being true is nothing but a logical fallacy. In every situation, in every argument, in every respect, the amount of people who believe something does, in no way, effect the likelihood of something existing. It simply doesn't, it can't.

 

Ahhh .. Islam is still lacking one more billion people. So it will take quite a long time for them to become majority . And I've already stated that this type of thinking applies to a limited amount of problems .

As for logical fallacy I though we agreed that God has nothing to do whit logic , simply because He's beyond human logic . We can't quantify nor rationalize him .

 

yes god is exist in present.

 

Don't you just love the occasional people who pop in to give their compelling evidence?

 

As I've stated, the average IQ is around 100, so someone needs to dumb it up.

 

it may not classify as evidence, but personal testimony. there is nothing wrong with that is there?

 

It was just an observation that tickled me. Here we are, hot on debate, whilst the odd person chimes in with such incomprehensive certainty. It's not a traditional contribution to an intellectual debate...

 

Blame the rule that you need 100 post before you can post in business section. He made his 100 post and now moved to where he wanted to post from beginning.

 

oh, so that rule does only apply to opinions you already believe to be true. like i said.

I said it was illogical, not that it has nothing to do with logic. Even if i accept that "god" is impossible to understand logically (which i don't), that doesn't make your arguments exempt from logic either. You can, and most people do, have a belief in god which is based on absolutely nothing, but if you are going to argue for it's existence your arguments have to be logical. For instance, when you posit a rule, you have to abide by it too. When you posit a basis for statistical probability, it applies to everything.

You seem to be doing, over and over again, the exact thing i have accused the religious of throughout this thread. Expecting their beliefs to receive special treatment and special concessions.

Sorry, but you don't get to just turn up and expect your position to be exempt from logic and even more exempt from the very rules you invented.

 

Nope , I said it applies to certain situations , I have not defined the way it must be applied . I have merely stated why it fits this situation .

A little bit of a contradiction there regarding you views on logic and God , nevertheless I appreciate that you've stated your position . Given my views based on analogical thinking and your views on fully logical thinking I assume we will not be able to reach a conclusion accepted by both of us . It still is a enjoyable debate .

What you seem to consider is that analogical rules must pass trough the filter of logic in which case you can only see them as flawed .

Do you consider that man is a fully logical creature and that analogical and illogical thinking don't exist ?

Ironically you sounds like you expect your views to be regarded as absolute due to the fact that you stick by strict logic . If you assume that this debate can only be solved trough logic . Then the only conclusion that comes out is the 50%-50% chance of existence as both sides fail to infirm the other ones views .

 

Yeah you did say that... after i showed you that actually following through with your premise that if a majority believe it it becomes a "law" would lead you to believe islam is true, which you obviously don't believe. It's called moving the goalposts, it's another logical fallacy.

Your god can be void/immune/exempt from logic, depending on what characteristics you assign to it... but your arguments can not. I could invent an illogical entity right now, a square circle for instance. But if i start defending the premise that it actually exists my arguments have to be logical.

Illogical thinking can exist, it's generally considered a bad thing. It's when a rationalisation doesn't make sense.

 

There is no god, except yourself. You are your own god and your own devil. You create your own heaven and your own hell.
"God" is for the weak-minded people who need to be told what to do.

 

Yes logic is so important when talking about God . It is well known that God = Logic and Islam = Majority . But not on this planet . You can try Mars thou .

So we'll talk about something we can't rationalize upon whit logic . Sounds like the equivalent of talking about logic using analogical and terms .

You can invent are defining words . Can anyone tell if God was invented ?

Yes I fully agree illogical thinking is bad . The brain is such a useless piece of biomass , we should replace it whit some CPUs . They'll do the job better then this garbage of an organ that we fully understand .

Yes you are the supreme . I have no God = I am God . Nice way of thinking . Fully compatible whit the modern world . Except that you strong-minded creature are on a forum asking for help from weak minded people .

 

Someone get this guy a book of logic....
I ask for help because I'm not perfect and don't know everything...no one does. Everyone needs another person's help at some point. So don't play stupid, well maybe you aren't PLAYING stupid. I'm strong-minded enough to admit that I need other people's help. What about yourself?

 

I don't bolster superiority over others based on my religion in the 1st place . Thinking in this way you can join the "my religion is better so I'm better" club . You'll be in the company of many lovely characters like : Zawahiri , Ahmadinejad , Osama and many other lovely characters .

 

You said what the majority believes is "law". you said it. Now either stand by it, or retract it.

I don't know what any of this means, so i'll just repeat myself and highlight the important word.
Your god can be void/immune/exempt from logic, depending on what characteristics you assign to it... but your arguments can not. I could invent an illogical entity right now, a square circle for instance. But if i start defending the premise that it actually exists my arguments have to be logical.

You seem to want to press the idea that your god is illogical for no reason other than that you think it gets you out of having to make sense.

 

@stOx : I've already said that consensus gentium only applies to a number of situation . If you want to take it and use it as a law of logic be my guest . It like cutting a big tree whit a fork . It won't work but you can try it .

I stand behind the fact that logical thinking can't be used to understand God . So enumerating the fallacies of logic is just a waste of time . You can theorize it all you want , you know just as well that a theory without a demonstration is useless .

When you talk about God you have to take into consideration all that he is attributed . Omniscience , omnipotence , creation of the Universe and so on . It is impossible to reason about omniscience for example ,simply because we have no idea what it is or what it feels like to have it . It like two 6 year old kids are talking about a driving a F1 monopost , we have no idea what we are talking about , we know it's red and it would be cool to have it .

 

How convenient that all the situations it applies to just happen to be things for which you need an argument supporting.
Anyone else would say you are making up shit as and when you need it.

Just because the attributes invented for your god don't make sense it doesn't give you a licence to make nonsensical arguments supporting it. Like i said, i can posit the existence of an illogical entity, a square circle, but my arguments for it's existence have to be logical.

Sorry, but you simply don't get out of having to make sense just by saying what you believe is illogical.

 

YES. i do belive GOD