B
Bear_Claw
Guest
Even if I was to suppose that philosophical answers are acceptable where scientific, hard evidence was required and asked for, the reasoning quoted on the catholic website is based in logical fallacy and on an assumption.
To move from agreeing that “I exist as an entity”, to the conclusion that “because I exists as an entity, there must be someone greater than me” is illogical.
He also jumps from labeling existence (esse) to characterizing it into god. It’s like calling “time” god. It’s illogical to jump to that conclusion.
Same with Peter Kreet’s website…he begins to ask if something can exist without us knowing it…and concludes (eventually) that that something is god. He speaks about the argument for intelligent design, but really what’s been proven? Nothing…
That’s why your philosophical sites will never convince anyone of god’s existence…because it’s all about assumptions and logic leaps.
Show me a hand that grows back and we can start to have a discussion on which god actually did that.
As far as asking for proof that god doesn’t exist, that’s also an incorrect question. it’s like me asking you to show me that a unicorn is not real…the burden of proof is on the person making the claim.