Is it possible to prove the existence of God using a rational argument?

Is it possible to prove the existence of God using a rational argument?

Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14

Black Rifle Cuck Company, Conservative Humor Shirt $21.68

Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14

  1. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Creation implies a creator.
    https://babylonbee.com/news/atheists-wait-at-table-for-thanksgiving-meal-to-evolve-from-nothing

  2. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Not without invoking an ontology to ground it thereby rendering it meaningless outside of the one little worldview in which that ontology works. There are plenty of rational arguments for God’s existence, the problem is that they only apply to very contrived contexts.

  3. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Absolutely. Which one?

  4. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Can you prove the existence of irrational straight lines using rational argument?

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      like the diagonal of a square with side length 1?

  5. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Is it possible to learn how to swim just by reading about it ?

    Without any access to water ?

    Or would one require experience to learn about this ?

  6. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Not unless the Big Guys straightly shows up from the sky, Old Testament style

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      *Big Guy, singular. Or maybe plural, who knows what's up there?

  7. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Not to a league of legends player.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Want to know his name he is my best friend

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        Actually get your own best friend

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        >league of legends player
        >friends
        Sure buddy.

  8. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    But the sensual man perceiveth not these things that are of the Spirit of God; for it is foolishness to him, and he cannot understand, because it is spiritually examined.
    [1 Corinthians 2:14]

  9. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Only with the Principle of Sufficient Reason assumed

  10. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    You can prove the nonexistence of the creator-god using rational argument.
    Being has no origin, because there is nothing outside being. Hence, being has no personal creator either.
    Only way to get around this is to say that there are two ways of being, the divine and the profane, and to insist that the former is the origin of the later. But if their ways of being are completely separate, there are no relations between them, including causation.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Is this based on Parmenides?

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        it's vaguely inspired by a style of argument British hegelians used against various forms of dualism, I'm sure they wouldn't approve of me trying to turn it against theism

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      how can you prove the non existence of God with your limited perception

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yes, see Avicenna's Proof of the Truthful. But something being proven is not sufficient to convince anyone.

      >Being has no origin, because there is nothing outside being.
      All this would prove is that God would have to exist forever, which is exactly what ontological arguments for necessary existence argue. Necessary existence has no personal creator, but contingent existence definitely can have, e.g. your parents brought you into existence.
      >the divine and the profane
      No, you can distinguish necessary and contigent being, which isn't the same as divine and profane being. And now your counter argument no longer works since causation can definitely be a relation between necessary and contingent being.

      If you have scientific proof sure, otherwise you are just choosing to believe in something and don't have a way to rationally make your argument beyond blind faith.

      The scientific method is restricted to physical reality, i.e. truths we can obtain empirically. But God's existence is a matter of metaphysics. It's in the same manner that the scientific method does not prove its own validity or that of mathematics.

      >a rational argument
      sure.
      >let god is real be true
      >god is real is true by definition

      you fricking moron zoomers should learn how logic works before trying to be le deep

      More like
      >If God is real, then ...
      >...thus God is real.
      Which is exactly how logical argumentation works. Nothing flawed about it.

  11. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    absolutely anon, Oyish users carry proof of the answers to metaphysics

  12. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    No, you need faith, that's the whole point.

  13. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    If you have scientific proof sure, otherwise you are just choosing to believe in something and don't have a way to rationally make your argument beyond blind faith.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      blind faith is all what we need, science won't save us

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        Anon, faith whether it is blind or not might be the one and only thing no one person or society can take away from you no matter what else happens to you whether caused intentionally or accidentally. Clearly you have mistaken what science has to offer if you are under some warped perception it exists solely to save you from something. Perhaps your pic related applies to you, in which case all I can say is that the only person who can change your habits is you, if you need to keep some sort of faith in order to avoid these things then you are welcome to keep your faith, but if want to convince others then you will always be arguing strictly from faith with no rational basis otherwise. It is this simple.

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          clearly putting so much faith in science won't save you

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Faith is not a requirement, and I don't expect it to save me from anything.

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        Almost got me

  14. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    No not really. There are some who tried but all failed. Those arguments only work if you don't think about them that much.

  15. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    There are arguments for why it is reasonable to believe in God (uncaused cause, fine tuning, etc) but there are no proofs. Like the other anon said, faith is the whole point

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      >uncaused cause

  16. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    >a rational argument
    sure.
    >let god is real be true
    >god is real is true by definition

    you fricking moron zoomers should learn how logic works before trying to be le deep

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      how it's working then braindead

  17. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Omnipotence doesn't need to be proved in order to exist, so no. A vain endeavour.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      basically True, God exist but we cannot prove it by logical argument

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        >God exist but we cannot prove it by logical argument
        Yes, because He doesn't merely exist.

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Yes, because He doesn't merely exist.
          He does

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            When Duns Scotus says "Literally God is not", do you think he's an atheist? He's not.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            and who is Duns Scotus

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Whatever you do, don't look it up. I'm done with this thread

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            you are moron

  18. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    No or it would've been done already.

  19. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    The holy Bible proves God and this makes atheist cucks furious

  20. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    No.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *