hopefulLandlord:

most apologists gloss over the fact that the KCA and most other popular arguments today (fine tuning, design, moral, Teleological, Ontological, etc.) are all deist arguments. If they convinced you, you'd be quite far from specifics about what deity(s) created the universe, how to please them, if they care about humans, etc.

KCA and other popular logical arguments were constructed by theists . KCA was constructed by the muslims . How are you ignorant of these things ?

The fact remains that the universe has a creator . The nature of the creator is and which religion It inspired is totally irrelevant to this argument since you are an atheist .

Gosh , this is becoming too easy .

KingEbukasBlog:


I countered it so easily . Its like a hobby these days . . You didn't have a logical rebuttal , so you resorted to empty vituperation . Its okay , atheists are NOT known to be logical and knowledgeable .

I dare you , rebut it .

I see nothing worth giving my time to rebut in that post

KingEbukasBlog:


KCA and other popular logical arguments were constructed by theists . KCA was constructed by the muslims . How are you ignorant of these things ?

The fact remains that the universe has a creator . The nature of the creator is and which religion It inspired is totally irrelevant to this argument since you are an atheist .

Gosh , this is becoming too easy .

No! nothing in it speaks of a creator,
didn't I address the Muslim part?
read my posts again cuz I've always told you comprehension is not your forte;

hopefulLandlord:


if everything is false it doesn't invalidate the existence of anything from the big foot to pink unicorns

even Craig said there's a "self authenticating witness of the holy spirit makes Christianity true" in other words Nonsense! even Arid Hamed exposed the illogicality of it all when Craig had the misfortune of debating him

NOTHING objectively logical backs Christianity up

Lmao !! Stop hiding under religious skepticism and face the existence of God . If I were a deist , your talks about Christianity is absolutely balderdash and evasive .

Focus on the argument and watch me humiliate you .

KingEbukasBlog:


Lmao !! Stop hiding under religious skepticism and face the existence of God . If I were a deist , your talks about Christianity is absolutely balderdash and evasive .

Focus on the argument and watch me humiliate you .

but you are not! that's the point!!

learn to read!!!

hopefulLandlord:


I see nothing worth giving my time to rebut in that post

Abeg JackBizzle abeg come we argue . This one just regurgitated what he read somewhere and can't even defend it .

KingEbukasBlog:


Abeg JackBizzle abeg come we argue . This one just regurgitated what he read somewhere and can't even defend it .

regurgitated? I'm sure you've googled furiously as you usually do and can't find anything

This actually shows how powerful these arguments are, atheists are now trying to restrict theists from using them.

hopefulLandlord:


but you are not! that's the point!!

learn to read!!!

YOU ARE AN ATHEIST . ATHEISM IS CONCERNED WITH THE EXISTENCE OF GOD NOT RELIGION .

You are meant to be concerned with arguing against the existence of God not being skeptical about religion because THE DEISTS ARE ALSO SKEPTICAL ABOUT RELIGION AND THEY ACKNOWLEDGE THE EXISTENCE OF GOD .

DO YOU GET IT AT ALL ?

hopefulLandlord:


regurgitated? I'm sure you've googled furiously as you usually do and can't find anything

And I'm responding with lightning speed ?

Stop evading and face the argument .

KingEbukasBlog:


You are shamelessly ignorant

Deism is a theological position and theology studies the nature of the divine . Deism posits that the nature of the divine is one which does not intervene in the affairs of man or the universe

Cosmological , Teleological , Ontological arguments were created theists Like Leibniz , Thomas Aquinas , and other theist intellectuals .

The philosophy of religion is different from the general view of theism or deism .

Gosh , you have no paucity of shame at all .

Bro. You need to calm down and read properly.

Cosmological arguments and co do not prove your religious God. I'm fact they argue for a deistic creator.

Creator and God are not the same.


The main point is that when you apologists argue for God's existence, you guys hardly use anything biblical. In fact, you guys start talking about how God was behind the big bang and his the universe is God.....

Richirich713:
This actually shows how powerful these arguments are, atheists are now trying to restrict theists from using them.

Very powerful my brother . As we can see JackBizzle and hopefullandlord have been sweating profusely over them . Looking for how to be evasive .

Hopefullandlord , come forth and let us end your Nairaland atheist career

JackBizzle:



Bro. You need to calm down and read properly.

Cosmological arguments and co do not prove your religious God. I'm fact they argue for a deistic creator.

Creator and God are not the same.


The main point is that when you apologists argue for God's existence, you guys hardly use anything biblical. In fact, you guys start talking about how God was behind the big bang and his the universe is God.....

that's my point and it keeps flying over their heads

KingEbukasBlog:

And I'm responding with lightning speed ?
Stop evading and face the argument .

like I said, I've seen nothing from you here worth my time countering

JackBizzle:



Bro. You need to calm down and read properly.

Cosmological arguments and co do not prove your religious God. I'm fact they argue for a deistic creator.

Creator and God are not the same.


The main point is that when you apologists argue for God's existence, you guys hardly use anything biblical. In fact, you guys start talking about how God was behind the big bang and his the universe is God.....

This is why I think atheists are inept at arguing against God's existence . You don't understand what you are against . You just argue blindly .

Theology studies the nature of God . And deism as a theological position insists that the God who created the universe does not intervene in it . Cosmological argument or other logical arguments for God's existence do not argue for the nature of the divine but its existence .

It goes like this

1. The existence of God
2. The nature of God
3. Religion

I will only use the bible when I'm arguing for the credibility and verity of Christianity with adherents of other theistic religions .

If I'm arguing with a deist I argue with my knowledge of theology . Because the deist has a different thought of the nature of God .

If I argue with an atheist , Im concerned about the existence of God not Christianity or other religions .

Do you get it now ?

JackBizzle:

Creator and God are not the same.

What?! Oh my God !

"God" is the title given to the creator of the universe .

Richirich713:


Can't be used for any God, Thor, Zeus, FSM etc all are finite, contingent beings. The Cosmological he gives can only be used to support monotheism or deism, it also directly proves atheism is false which is one of his goals.

From there he makes his cumulative case.

Lies.

1. Zeus and FSM are not finite. They are gods.

2. The kalam cosmological argument does not l8mit the number of creators.

3. The Cosmological argument fails on so many levels. First. It does not solve the problem of infinite regress but rather suggests that an uncreated creator solves it. But then that uncreated creator could be an alien, a ghost or a spaghetti monster

KingEbukasBlog:


What?! Oh my God !

"God" is the title given to the creator of the universe .

In your religion and not others.

Don't be ignorant

JackBizzle:


3. The Cosmological argument fails on so many levels. First. It does not solve the problem of infinite regress but rather suggests that an uncreated creator solves it. But then that uncreated creator could be an alien, a ghost or a spaghetti monster

1. Whatever begins to exist must have a cause

This premise agrees that there are somethings that are without a cause and those things are uncreated . Eg God , abstract/mathematical objects

Infinite regress solved !

KingEbukasBlog:


This is why I think atheists are inept at arguing against God's existence . You don't understand what you are against . You just argue blindly .

Theology studies the nature of God . And deism as a theological position insists that the God who created the universe does not intervene in it . Cosmological argument or other logical arguments for God's existence do not argue for the nature of the divine but its existence .

It goes like this

1. The existence of God
2. The nature of God
3. Religion

I will only use the bible when I'm arguing for the credibility and verity of Christianity with adherents of other theistic religions .

If I'm arguing with a deist I argue with my knowledge of theology . Because the deist has a different thought of the nature of God .

If I argue with an atheist , Im concerned about the existence of God not Christianity or other religions .

Do you get it now ?

Your Christian religion covers the nature and existence of God and so, your ordered list is nonsense.


Furthermore, this is why there is a distinction between theology and Christianity or Christian theology.

JackBizzle:


In your religion and not others.

Don't be ignorant

Either way , atheism is invalidated . Because the creator does exist , whatever you call him God or ghost or whatever atheism will still be dead and buried .

JackBizzle:



Your Christian religion covers the nature and existence of God and so, your ordered list is nonsense.


Furthermore, this is why there is a distinction between theology and Christianity or Christian theology.

You are not making any sense . Or you are being disingenuous . The fact still is that the arguments for God's existence have nothing do with the nature of God and deism as a theological position is concerned with the nature of God as a non-interventionist God .

This thread is empty as usual . Have a nice day !

KingEbukasBlog:



1. Whatever begins to exist must have a cause

This premise agrees that there are somethings that are without a cause and those things are uncreated . Eg God , abstract/mathematical objects

Infinite regress solved !

Whatever begins to exist must have a cause.


That is, every physical thing has a cause.



The only things that don't have a cause that we know of are abstract (mom material) things.

So In short, your God is abstract......imaginary.

KingEbukasBlog:


Either way , atheism is invalidated . Because the creator does exist , whatever you call him God or ghost or whatever atheism will still be dead and buried .

Exactly
These ignorant folks don't know that by opening this thread on deism, they have admitted that the atheism argument is dead.

KingEbukasBlog:


You are not making any sense . Or you are being disingenuous . The fact still is that the arguments for God's existence have nothing do with the nature of God and deism as a theological position is concerned with the nature of God as a non-interventionist God .

This thread is empty as usual . Have a nice day !

Lol.....how can you separate nature from existence, especially when your Christian religion fuses both?



How can you argue for my existence without also mentioning my nature? How do you argue that I exist separately from my dog?

felixomor:

Exactly
These ignorant folks don't know that by opening this thread on deism, they have admitted that the atheism argument is dead.

Exactly my brother . The OP does not know that this has exposed atheism and its dead arguments . Isn't deism arguing for God's existence too ?

Oh dear ! !!!

JackBizzle:



Whatever begins to exist must have a cause.


That is, every physical thing has a cause. .
.

And you have the problem of infinite regress to solve .

Gosh , this is so easy .

felixomor:

Exactly
These ignorant folks don't know that by opening this thread on deism, they have admitted that the atheism argument is dead.

Oh.....and deism validates Christianity ABI?

So Jesus was preaching about his deist father in space?

JackBizzle:

Lies.

You a guys need to relax with this "lies!" stuff, I already said in my next post that its possible that there could be multiple eternal beings.

I took your claim "His strongest argument could be used for any God." to be an error on ur side, not a lie. So chill if u think I made a factual error, say so, not accuse me of lying.

1. Zeus and FSM are not finite. They are gods.

Contingent gods, meaning Cosmological arguments won't work with them.

2. The kalam cosmological argument does not l8mit the number of creators.

Already said so in next post.

3. The Cosmological argument fails on so many levels. First. It does not solve the problem of infinite regress but rather suggests that an uncreated creator solves it. But then that uncreated creator could be an alien, a ghost or a spaghetti monster

I'm not arguing for it, just showing the portrayal of craig as arguing for deism is incorrect.

JackBizzle:



Lol.....how can you separate nature from existence, especially when your Christian religion fuses both?



How can you argue for my existence without also mentioning my nature? How do you argue that I exist separately from my dog?

You exist is one thing . Your nature is another thing .

I know there's a jackbizzle - this is one thing . But I don't how you look like , do I ? I don't . But this does not change the fact there is indeed a JackBizzle .

This is easy na bro ... haba !

JackBizzle:



Oh.....and deism validates Christianity ABI?

So Jesus was preaching about his deist father in space?

Ogbeni , you don't have any other reasonable thing to say . Its not by force to comment .

Take your L and depart in peace .

KingEbukasBlog:


And you have the problem of infinite regress to solve .

Gosh , this is so easy .

The difference between my atheistic materialist philosophy is that I focus on real problems while you choose imaginary solutions.


The problem of infinite regress is a difficult one that has not been solved. A paradox. I admit it.


You on the other hand, have faith in the imaginary solution that doesn't answer anything.

Your answer means that your God is abstract. Imaginary. Unreal. Only such things could be said not to have a beginning