Can anyone prove the existence of God?

if you don't have evidence, then I guess that's not what you are pinning your rationalism on.

you say this through one side of your mouth an allude to god being a fabrication through the other ... although admittedly this does seem to make you happy ....

whenever you are ready to apply yourself, drop me a line

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You seem unable to follow a discussion...

LG: Unless you can indicate what evidence would be contradicted if intelligent design was proven...
Me: No evidence would be contradicted...
LG: that's why I am asking you what evidence would be contradicted if ID was proven.
Me: None.
LG: You still haven't coughed up any evidence
Me: Evidence for what?
LG: if you don't have evidence, then I guess that's not what you are pinning your rationalism on

:shrug:
First you ask which evidence would be contradicted, and then seem to follow that as though you have asked me for evidence in general, despite already answering your initial question.

Where is the allusion to God being a fabrication in what I have said?
You made the assumption that there is an initial cause - although fail to accept it as an assumption.
I have merely stated "I don't know" whether there was an initial cause or not.
If you feel that not having this knowledge alludes to God being a fabrication then this is your fear, not mine.

You should share it with researchers into the origins of the universe... you might make a fortune.
But since your application has a prerequirement of belief in God it boils down to "believe to believe".
Hey ho.


And so another futile conversation with you draws to a close.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

and if you take it back a bit further

Sarkus : Intelligent design fails due to not being rationally based on the evidence. The evidence just simply does not lead to that conclusion

So what evidence are you talking about?
All you have done is indicated that (IYHO) its incredulous, without identifying exactly what you are talking about.

Where you talk of god being a claim not based on evidence of course.

You've yet to point out why it is an irrational assumption ... or even how one can lay any claim whatsoever that doesn't ride off the back off core assumptions.
I mean unless you have some sort of philosophical critique to offer, pointing out how god is based on the assumption that there is an ultimate cause .... it is just like stating that empiricism is based on the assumption that sense perception provides a means of analyzing the outside world .... which, btw, would be a fair enough point if one was talking about what one can and cannot achieve with empiricism.
Unless you have some sort of critique or analysis to go with your pointing the finger at an assumption, you are not really contributing anything.

The problem is that your "I don't know" also contextualizes the claims of all others - at the very least, when you say there is no evidence, you a re certainly giving the impression of extrapolating a bit further than your own inner experiences ...

actually it begins with application (although you could argue that application - of anything - begins with belief)
As for making a fortune by investigating the origins of the universe, it sounds like once again you are discussing theism as if it is to have any value, it must be a sub branch of empiricism


[QUOTEAnd so another futile conversation with you draws to a close.[/QUOTE]
..... I take it you are not quite ready to apply yourself just yet, eh?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Perhaps because he doesn't know why he should do it, or what he can expect from such an application.

He may see God, yes, and then what?