Is there truly undeniable proof that God exists

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mike5575
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No such book exists. No such book can exist. Such a book would obviate the need for faith and belief and is is tus that God wants us to know Him.
 
One who’s determined to deny the existence of God will find a way to do so, even if it means engaging in irrationality. A while back, a novel was published that explores what might result from the discovery of an absolutely irrefutable argument for God:
Laurence Cosse, A Corner of the Veil (Scribner, 1996); ISBN 0-684-84667-5

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+
 
Cruciform said:
One who’s determined to deny the existence of God will find a way to do so, even if it means engaging in irrationality. A while back, a novel was published that explores what might result from the discovery of an absolutely irrefutable argument for God:
Laurence Cosse, A Corner of the Veil (Scribner, 1996); ISBN 0-684-84667-5

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+
Click to expand...
I don’t think you’re telling us anything new. 😃
 
James_S_Saint said:
But what do you think that argument is actually saying that would be objectionable?
Click to expand...
As I said before, it’s the good ol’ “we don’t know where this thing comes from so god must have done it”.

5000 years ago it was applied to floods and lightnings, today it’s being applied to big bangs and logical absolutes.
 
stenlis said:
As I said before, it’s the good ol’ “we don’t know where this thing comes from so god must have done it”.

5000 years ago it was applied to floods and lightnings, today it’s being applied to big bangs and logical absolutes.
Click to expand...
But where does the transcendental proof say that??
 
James_S_Saint said:
But where does the transcendental proof say that??
Click to expand...
What “transcendental proof”?

Bahnsen never laid out any clear premises from which we can draw a conclusion about the existence of God. He merely declared that it is impossible God doesn’t exist, and so therefore he does.
 
James_S_Saint said:
But where does the transcendental proof say that??
Click to expand...
This is an attempt to demonstrate the existence of God using logical absolutes. The oversimplified argument, which is expanded in outline form below, goes as follows: Logical absolutes exist. Logical absolutes are conceptual by nature, are not dependent on space, time, physical properties, or human nature. They are not the product of the physical universe (space, time, matter), because if the physical universe were to disappear, logical absolutes would still be true. Logical Absolutes are not the product of human minds, because human minds are different, not absolute. But, since logical absolutes are always true everywhere, and not dependent upon human minds, it must be an absolute transcendent mind that is authoring them. This mind is called God.
Click to expand...
 
hatsoff said:
What “transcendental proof”?

Bahnsen never laid out any clear premises from which we can draw a conclusion about the existence of God. He merely declared that it is impossible God doesn’t exist, and so therefore he does.
Click to expand...
He didn’t even say that much. He couldn’t get up to that point because Stein kept refusing that logic is necessarily true.

And I had asked that question of someone else from a prior post.
 
James_S_Saint said:
He didn’t even say that much. He couldn’t get up to that point because Stein kept refusing that logic is necessarily true.

And I had asked that question of someone else from a prior post.
Click to expand...
Logic is the study of rules of inference. Logic is not itself “true” or “false,” but rather useful or not useful.
 
hatsoff said:
Logic is the study of rules of inference. Logic is not itself “true” or “false,” but rather useful or not useful.
Click to expand...
I would contend that Logic IS the set of rules for inference. Despite websites, it is NOT merely “a study”.

But you didn’t answer my questions;

A) Do you believe that something can be what it is and also be what it isn’t?
B) What is incoherent about the question of (A)?
 
Answer to the OP: **No.

**Or at least, nobody on this forum has rocked up with anything that you can’t drive a bus through.

Logically speaking, if there were ‘truly undeniable proof’ that God exists, then everybody would believe in God.
 
wanstronian said:
…Logically speaking, if there were ‘truly undeniable proof’ that God exists, then everybody would believe in God.
Click to expand...
Doubtful. As any student of philosophy knows, to know the good is not necessarily to do the good.

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+
 
James_S_Saint said:
I don’t think you’re telling us anything new. 😃
Click to expand...
Sorry, I wasn’t aware that the goal was novelty. 😉 If so, prepare for disappointment, since this ground was more than well-trod long before we on this thread showed up.

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+
 
Cruciform said:
Sorry, I wasn’t aware that the goal was novelty. 😉 If so, prepare for disappointment, since this ground was more than well-trod long before we on this thread showed up.

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+
Click to expand...
Yeah, no joke. I can’t believe we are still arguing over 2500 year old issues.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top