Logical Proof of Existence of a Divine Creator, Why Atheism is Not Logically Sound

Just think of the millions upon millions of superstitions that most people used to believe. The god of abraham is just another one that is bound to be seen as just another superstition some time in the future.

---

I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.

Yes, but you aren't delusional enough to tell someone who is vastly more qualified than you are on a particular subject that you know far more than they do. I shouldn't continually be surprised by the gullibility of some people, but I just think that before people make claims about something they clearly know nothing about they should research the subject first and not take anyone's word for anything.It just short circuited something in my head that someone was harping on about logic whilst writing an article that had no logic in it!No wonder so many evangelicals make fortunes, they are preaching to brain dead morons.Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Note - In part because of this message, Brian got a 24 hour suspension.

Ypostelnik / Yomen joined on 11 June, initiated this thread the same day, posted an inconsequential acknowledgement, and has not posted again.I followed the forum a few years back (and see some of the same major players) and found that the believers would post their theories, get blown away, and never mount a reasonable defense of the position.Rather than facing that, examining it, and engaging in a rational discussion, they drop the conversation, pretend it did not happen and continue to espouse their nonsense as though the conversation had never taken place. They totally ignore the fact that their positions cannot withstand scrutiny, and continue to preach their falsehoods.To me, this is not only hypocrisy, but outright deceitful behavior, both to everyone around them, and to themselves.In a purely logical sense, that is their problem and not mine. I am far better off letting them behave neurotically and just go about my business.However, and this is a big one, people like him continue to force their beliefs on the remainder of society. Might does not make right. There are enough of them to institute and carry out their wishes. That makes it rather difficult to atheists and other, shall I say, believers of a lesser degree, to ignore them and continue our lives. We are daily forced to confront their beliefs, while they refuse to acknowledge the deficits of those beliefs.This rant might be taken as a personal attack. I believe that Yomen will not return, will not read this, and as such it is not directed at him personally. But it is directed at that genre of behavior.I wish I knew how to deal with this. I feel that no one does have an effective method of dealing with this behavior. What can be done?Edit: I don't like my term "believers of a lesser degree." The intent is belivers who follow their belief but don't try to cram it down others throats. How would you say that politely and succintly?Edited by jag, : Clarify a term that looks bad

Hi Percy,Can I ask why you decided to promote this topic?In post 2 you informed the member that:We have a few requirements for posts that introduce a new topic. Relevant rules from the Forum Guidelines:

3. When introducing a new topic, please keep the message narrowly focused. Do not include more than a few points.

​

6. Avoid lengthy cut-n-pastes. Introduce the point in your own words and provide a link to your source as a reference. If your source is not on-line you may contact the Site Administrator to have it made available on-line.

Please edit your Message 1 so that it is in compliance with the Forum Guidelines, then post a note to this thread when you're done and I'll take another look.Your first point that suggests an OP should contain no more than a few points seems to exclude this topic from promotion as it contains NO points at all for discussion!Then you say Introduce the point in your own words and provide a link to your source as a reference. Can you point out where the member has done this in the OP?The author of the OP hasn't introduced anything, we do not even know what it is he wishes to discuss.So, why was it promoted?Edited by Brian, : spelling

Brian,
1 - Please do not send me obnoxious emails personally
2 - I have no idea why you so want to stifle debate or opinion that differs from your own. It's not a cut and paste, it's my own article.As to the points, I would encourage readers to read this piece as most of the answers to the questions raised are dealt with herein. Yomin Postelnik – Debate With Atheists | The Logic of CreationismI have yet to see any substantive retort to the any of the premises outlined in the original column that starts this thread.

That's a really funny reply of yours with your baseless allegations of plagiarism. I guess you'll stop at nothing, including sending personal emails of harassment and making mundane challenges to why this viewpoint is featured at all (as if it's not yours, it must be silenced). I specifically spoke about three central historical arguments for Divine existence, non of which you care to discuss.As to your question the Bible lists 600,000 men between the ages of 20-60. That would make 2.5 mil a very conservative estimate. But of course, none of that is material to any of the arguments laid out in the column.

Here, what would you like to debate?
Yomin Postelnik – Debate With Atheists | The Logic of Creationism

I see that when you can't debate an idea you're stuck twisting words. Any sane reader understood that what the column said is that if you say there was no intelligent Creator then you are saying that each and every step involved in the formation of anything happened spontaneously. That was clear. Please read the actual column and what was said instead of misrepresenting and I'll be happy to answer any questions or discuss any counter points of substance.

I'm not saying that one needs to know the Bible. But if one talks about the Bible and chooses to cite passages, he should at least know what he's talking about, especially when presenting it as a vocal challenge. Read the entire chapters in Exodus dealing with the event. It clearly says that the entire nation, men, women and children saw the transmission, saw the Divine Presence coming down and heard the Word and the Commandments being spoken, Divinely, not by Moses.But it seems that honest debate is not what you are after as you yourself quoted the passage about 600,000 men (which again, were only those between 20-60 as is clear from the text).

BeagleBob,You seem to have a profound misunderstanding of all the arguments you seek to counter.All religions state that the Creator is not physical and transcends physicality. See the debate,on your second question - the entire point is that all of the details necessary for formation, on a scientific level, are intricate and rely on trillions of simultaneous happenings for life to form. Something that vast and intricate must have an intelligent Creator. So countering with "there's science behind it" is no counter, it's the very point the argument is making.As to evolutionary biology, I doubt Darwin would believe in it today given the lack of transitional fossils and being that non-life would have had to turn into living molecules, etc. millions of times, each separately, to effect the rich variety found in DNA/RNA.So no, neither argument was refuted.

I didn't send an obnoxious email.Here is the email I sent you: Hi, I am writing to ask if you have any intention of discussing the issues raised by the article that you linked ot on EvCforum.net.

​

Your article has been thouroughly disected and shown to have some very grave errors in it.

​

I think it is only fair that you are aware of this so that you can defend the issues that you have raised in your article.

​

I hope you aren't another 'drive-by' poster who wastes people time.Where is there anything obnoxious in my email?I enquired whether or not you intended on responding for 2 reasons.1. Were we wasting our time replying to your OP?2. Your article has been shown to have many grave errors in it and you deserve a chance to defend those 'alleged' errors.There is nothing personal about you at all in my email.However, your email response was completely unwarranted. I am trying to initiate a debate for God sake.You posted a bare link, against forum rules, it was promoted for some unkown reason, I mailed you to instigate a debate. THIS is a debate forum, you started a thread on this website and have no intention of debating it on THIS website.This is nothing but spam. Well you wouldn't. Since you really do not even have a basic grasp of what philosophy is how can we expect you to know what logic is.

This thread appears to be spinning out of control. Please keep all discussion civil and focused on the topic. Give the Forum Guidelines a once over, particularly rule 10.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Brian,
Both your email and your posts are over the top. Is there any reason you won't deal with something of substance or your erroneous representation of the Bible? Edited by ypostelnik, : No reason given.

This is another reason why I know your grasp of philosophy is very poor because even first year high school students recognise William Paley's Argument from Design.Your example is just the same as many other who simply replace designed and constructed items with other designed and constructed items, then come up with a faulty conclusion. It is NOT YOUR argument, it belongs to William Paley. WTF are you on about? Not at that particular moment I didn't, but you have probably been hammered senseless and shown so many times where your faulty logic is letting your arguments down that there would be no point. But if you want to get on the philosophical merry-go-round I am happy to. But it is.The quality of someone's research can be found in the finer details of a piece of writing, after all if you misquote a source then perhaps you can misquote another source. If someone's research is sloppy on the so-called smaller issues, then why trust them on the bigger ones?Anyway, do you admit that the Bible does not claim what you say it does, namely, and I will quote from your article:To begin with, the Bible is the only book in the history of mankind to make the claim that part of it was given by the Creator in front of an entire nation ( of 600,000 families, totaling a few million people). Does the Bible claim what you say it does?Edited by Brian, : Can't spell Paleys's

You want people to read a debate in which you're coming up with meaningless rubbish like that?Now, tell me what's wrong with your statement that I quoted above. Show us that you understand what a genome is, if you want to talk about biology.