Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Spirituality & Mysticism
Cosmo's Big Thread of Anti-Theism
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TimeWizardCosmo" data-source="post: 82067" data-attributes="member: 2"><p><span style="font-size: 18px"><strong><strong>Assuming god exists, arguments against theist claims are illogical/fallacious. </strong></strong></span></p><p></p><p>Things can exist in different contexts: God exists, in the sense that God is an idea that people have. Atheists can comment perfectly fine on the implications of belief and on god as a character without being required to believe in god.</p><p></p><p>When atheists agree with the premise of a god’s existence for the purpose of showing the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum" target="_blank">absurdity</a> of a theistic argument, they may still question conclusions about god’s nature by debating the correctness of the inference. For example:</p><p></p><p><em>God exists.</em></p><p><em>Therefore, you should worship god</em>.</p><p></p><p>Simply because a god may exist, does imply said god requires worship. In fact, a perfect god should, by definition, require nothing. This is known as a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_%28logic%29" target="_blank">non sequitur</a>.</p><p></p><p><em>“There is nothing more telling of a person’s fundamental lack of perspective and humility than an insistence that if they cannot reconcile their beliefs with reality, then reality itself must be wrong.”</em> – Anonymous</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TimeWizardCosmo, post: 82067, member: 2"] [SIZE=5][B][B]Assuming god exists, arguments against theist claims are illogical/fallacious. [/B][/B][/SIZE] Things can exist in different contexts: God exists, in the sense that God is an idea that people have. Atheists can comment perfectly fine on the implications of belief and on god as a character without being required to believe in god. When atheists agree with the premise of a god’s existence for the purpose of showing the [URL='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum']absurdity[/URL] of a theistic argument, they may still question conclusions about god’s nature by debating the correctness of the inference. For example: [I]God exists.[/I] [I]Therefore, you should worship god[/I]. Simply because a god may exist, does imply said god requires worship. In fact, a perfect god should, by definition, require nothing. This is known as a [URL='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_%28logic%29']non sequitur[/URL]. [I]“There is nothing more telling of a person’s fundamental lack of perspective and humility than an insistence that if they cannot reconcile their beliefs with reality, then reality itself must be wrong.”[/I] – Anonymous [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Paranormal Forum
Spirituality & Mysticism
Cosmo's Big Thread of Anti-Theism
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top