The same argument applies to the universe though.
That’s what I mean. It is all just a mystery. No one can prove the existence of God and no one can prove that God does not exist.
No one knows what the meaning of life is. We will only find out when we die and we can’t come back and tell anyone.
If there is no proof that god exists, is more logical to conclude he likely does exist, or that he likely does not exist.
There is no proof that he doesn’t exist though. Nobody knows.
But you do, so that means that your mind is…inhuman?
No mind mind is not inhuman. Thanks. What forum are we in again?:dubious:
The Pit, so buckle up 
Delta rage in 3… 2… 1…
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU–
The burden of proof is on the person making the positive claim. No proof that he does exist means that he probably does not exist, or at least that there is no reason to believe he exists. No proof that he doesn’t exist means, well, nothing. I mean, how would you ever disprove anything?
There’s no proof that the Great Green Arkleseizure doesn’t exist either. Should we fear The Coming Of The Great White Handkerchief, just in case?
If nobody can know, then who cares?
Okay, I think Peter Kreeft is an idiot.
Great job!!! Now do you actually want to take a stab at refuting his arguments?
Is this that evangelical agnosticism I keep hearing about? ‘I don’t know, and neither do you.’
I don’t see that he actually has any.
God always was is a stupid concept. But, since you’re a dipshit, I suppose that explains your devotion to it.
A sentient, universe-creating creature not needing an explanation for existing isn’t what a smart person would see as a gotcha for the question of the origin of the universe.
When you die your brain will start to rot. Your brain creates your consciousness through mechanical operations. Your consciousness will fade utterly and permanently once you brain can no longer support it.
When you die you wont have any answers, because you will shut off and not know anything at all.
On the upside, the average intelligence of the human race will rise a bit on that day.
Arguments 1-3 are pretty much textbook examples of “begging the question”. “Something can’t come from nothing and change can’t happen without an outside force, therefore God” is only valid if we accept the premises and those are very shaky premises indeed.
Argument 4 is a badly misunderstood version of the Theory of Forms and makes no sense at all in reality.
Argument 5 says that the universe must have had a designer because the concept of things happening this way by “chance” is too hard to grasp with our poor widdle bwains. “I don’t understand it, therefore it’s not true” is not a valid argument.
Argument 6 is another case of “begging the question”.
Argument 7 is tautological up to step 4 where it explodes in a shower of unsupported blather.
All phenomenally poor arguments. Is there any point in continuing further?
Jesus?
I looked at that list and saw Pascal’s Wager.
I then broke out laughing. Maybe I’ll answer it when I get home from school, but really? Anything that lists pascal’s wager as a serious argument for the existence of god is logically bankrupt and loses a shitload of credibility.