8,728
edits
Changes
Talk:Arguments for the existence of God (view source)
Revision as of 00:20, July 5, 2008
, 00:20, July 5, 2008→Freewill
: Flattered! Seems like when everybody's more interested in learning than in defending themselves, there's very little for anybody to argue about and everybody comes away with more than they arrived with:). [[User:Ungtss|Ungtss]] 17:05, 25 September 2007 (EDT)
: Flattered! Seems like when everybody's more interested in learning than in defending themselves, there's very little for anybody to argue about and everybody comes away with more than they arrived with:). [[User:Ungtss|Ungtss]] 17:05, 25 September 2007 (EDT)
::Indeed again! Personally I find the last two arguments - free will and consciousness - rather weak. Arguments maybe but certainly not proofs in any meaningful sense. If used to debate with atheists, they can easily be refuted. It makes the case weaker except when there is no debate, i.e. among theists. My edit would be simply to delete those two sections as they detract from the whole article, but that might be controversial. [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 08:43, 28 September 2007 (EDT)
::Indeed again! Personally I find the last two arguments - free will and consciousness - rather weak. Arguments maybe but certainly not proofs in any meaningful sense. If used to debate with atheists, they can easily be refuted. It makes the case weaker except when there is no debate, i.e. among theists. My edit would be simply to delete those two sections as they detract from the whole article, but that might be controversial. [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 08:43, 28 September 2007 (EDT)
==Aristotle==
[[Aristotle]] first of all does prove that an infinite chain of events is impossible. An infinite chain of events is impossible it even disagrees with science. Second of all the cosmological argument is compatible with the God of the Bible, unlike the other editor says, he/she must not be aware that [[Thomas Aquinas]], [[Maimonides]] and others used it to argue that there is a [{God]].