View Single Post
Old 09-18-2020, 03:26 AM   #115
mmm mmm good
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Mount Olympus
Posts: 5,509
Re: Something from nothing

If you're serious that you genuinely hadn't picked up on the fact that I think that you admitted that your god beliefs are illogical, despite me mentioning this in most of the 'the last 50ish posts'... then I question your reading comprehension, your intelligence, or whether you're reading my posts properly. Yet another of your regular criticisms of me that you appear to be guilty of. This thread is a gold mine of Aaron shooting himself in the foot. Being a hypocrite doesn't make you wrong about anything, but it does make you a hypocrite.

Originally Posted by Aaron W. View Post
Yeah.... you really just don't know how stupid this is.

1) The OP is not a problem for anyone other than the person making it because it's logically invalid.
2) Your argument is not equivalent to Kalam.
3) Kalam is not a necessary argument for people who believe in God to hold. In other words, just because someone believes in God, it does not mean that they endorse the Kalam argument as the reason they believe in God.
4) I never made any special pleading because I never presented made any arguments.
So stupid that it made you abandon Creationism. lol. So stupid that it caused you to admit that you don't think god can be proved using formal logic. So, you undermined apologetics and threw a fundamental Christian belief under the bus, and all to support something that you can't even prove logically and so you started to try to prove that my beliefs aren't formed using formal logic and immediately abandonded that when it became clear that you'd shot yourself in the foot again. lol. You can't escape logic Aaron, every second of any reasoning you ever do is subject to it, and if you can't show that the existence of the god you believe in is logical, then it's illogical, there aren't any other options.

The OP is not logically invalid.

The OP is not only similar to the Kalam in that it's guilty of special pleading but it uses a fundamental understanding relied on in the Kalam, a claim that supports a Kalam premise (which you apparently weren't aware of).

I never explicitly said that anyone had to 'endorse' anything. (I'm doing a you here... so don't bother trying to show that I must mean that even though I didn't say it unless you want to apply those rules to yourself to, so go ahead, shoot yourself in the foot again)

You think god has always existed even though you can point to nothing else that has always existed to demonstrate that this is a reasonable property to assign to something, and you believe that everything that exists has a cause, except god. You are guilty of special pleading even though you have never explicitly made an argument containing special pleading (probably why you dismiss the Kalam even though you have nothing better to offer). You seem to think that your weasel wording is escaping you from this, but it isn't. It's what you believe, and you can't prove it logically. So we'll assume it illogical until proven otherwise

You asked me for a syllogism so that you could prove that it didn't inform my belief on the subject of the syllogism, so, I'm still waiting for that to happen...

P1) Aaron has admitted that his god beliefs are illogical
P2) Aaron is always truthful
C) It's true that Aaron's god beliefs are illogical

You started that Aaron, not me, so finish it...
Mightyboosh is offline   Reply With Quote