Analysis of Christopher Hitchen's argument against God

Quote from MarketMasher:

I never made any claims to be so knowledgeable - but then I never claimed to know with Certainty about the existence/non of God.

Who did?

The question of God is almost as old as mankind - but you are saying you, in your limited knowledge of the entire of this (or other) universe(s) have the answer.

Have you ever been wrong? If you say "No", you are a liar. If you say "Yes", then what would make you think you can not be wrong in your Certainty on such a question as old as that?

Would you say you are infallible?


Because, you know, there is supposedly only 1 Being who could claim that.... :D
More...

one "Being"...as in Be-ing, to exist?

then this Being of yours (God) is limited, by definition to existence!

good we are getting somewhere...
 
God is limited to existence?

How so?

To make this coherent on your part, first define existence...

Oh, and since you claim there is no God...then you are claiming God does not exist...and you are claiming that God is limited to existence?

If existence is without limit, and if God is existence, then God is not limited to or by existence. You are speaking of something external and relational...existence or no existence...duality.

God is not limited to duality, as God is Totality which includes all of the parts and the whole at the same time. Duality and monolithic all all times and all place, at no particular time and at no particular place.

Your brain is going to lock up on this one...or you are going to cry for stu to come rescue you, and whatever stu says you are going to fawn all over it like a teenage girl with a crush on Justin Beiber...

Quote from killthesunshine:

one "Being"...as in Be-ing, to exist?

then this Being of yours (God) is limited, by definition to existence!

good we are getting somewhere...
More...
 
takes a lot of words for you to say "God is is everything, and God is nothing. God is great, God is bad"..God just Is ALL.

so what

All= all. Everthing =everything.
 
the the real question is...is your God GOOD optional, for anything else or any-body except Itself, and you?

can you prove this optional?? or do you worship and admire evil omnipotence? :eek: :eek: :eek:
 
See, the problem is that we as human beings have to see partial values, relative values, because that is the nature of the universe.

The universe is a whole, and it is also a collection of all of the parts.

Is God the universe?

Well, is the universe Totality?

So you can't deny that by my definition of God, God does exist.

Is that meaningful for you?

Doesn't matter. What does matter is that this illustrates that the definition of God does in fact matter in discussions of God and God's nature.

Is God good for anyone? God is necessary for everyone by my definition.

For there to be parts, there must be a whole. If there is only a single singularity, then there is still a whole singularity. No whole, no possible parts of a whole. No parts? Still a whole of no parts.

Now, what part of the whole story don't you understand? You appear to be confused...


Quote from killthesunshine:

the the real question is...is your God GOOD optional, for anything else or any-body except Itself, and you?

can you prove this optional?? or do you worship and admire evil omnipotence? :eek: :eek: :eek:
More...
 
Quote from killthesunshine:

one "Being"...as in Be-ing, to exist?

then this Being of yours (God) is limited, by definition to existence!

good we are getting somewhere...
More...


Do you not know the definition of "supposedly"??

Somebody get a dictionary!!!
 
Wait...I've had.....an epiphany......

You see, the question of God has existed almost since communal man has - that is to say, more than a week....

And we know that the idea of God existed at least up to around WWII, when Einstein said "I want to know God's thoughts; everything else is details." (It may have continued after that, but you will have to provide proof.)

But Stu has claimed Certainty that there is no God. (Stated not as opinion, but as fact.)

So, for him to be right, at least 2 things must align (like stars in the heavens)....

1) Stu must be infallible. For if he is not, then he is capable of error on this question that is more ancient than a week, and therefore must be doubted....

2) Stu must be smarter than Einstein, for Einstein clearly believed in God (albeit, not a "Personal God")

Combine these two and Stu is smarter than Einstein and infallible!

SO we must ask - what Being would fit such a description? So - can it be.....???

Stu.... = _ _ _.......!!!!!
 
Quote from stu:

You asked me if I know. I said Sure. I gave you my answer. It's not a claim.
More...


Actually your exact quote was :
Quote from stu:

Sure I know.
Everything else must be just your "opinion" then.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=215062&perpage=6&pagenumber=47
More...

Anybody can verify my statement as true and correct and reveal your lie.


Sorry kts you lose again since you thought his sleight of hand (lie) would go unchallenged but unfortunately for you & stu he cannot change his previous posts .
 
Let me spell it out for you.

Firstly, you say someone has to be all knowledgeable to know about the existence or non existenece of God.

So how come YOU know that about the existence or non existenece of God . Are you all knowledegable?
Your argument is self-defeating and silly.

Secondly, I've done no such thing as to make claims of certainty.
There is no need to make any such claim in or of certainty.
There is just no reason to disprove by certainty or anything else, something like God, which has no evidence of proof in the first place.

Hope that helps.


Quote from MarketMasher:

I never made any claims to be so knowledgeable - but then I never claimed to know with Certainty about the existence/non of God.

Who did?

The question of God is almost as old as mankind - but you are saying you, in your limited knowledge of the entire of this (or other) universe(s) have the answer.

Have you ever been wrong? If you say "No", you are a liar. If you say "Yes", then what would make you think you can not be wrong in your Certainty on such a question as old as that?

Would you say you are infallible?


Because, you know, there is supposedly only 1 Being who could claim that.... :D
More...
 
Quote from LORD KAL-EL:
Quote from stu:
You asked me if I know. I said Sure. I gave you my answer. It's not a claim.

Quote from LORD KAL-EL:
Actually your exact quote was :
Quote from stu:
Sure I know.
Everything else must be just your "opinion" then.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showt...6&pagenumber=47

Quote from LORD KAL-EL:
Anybody can verify my statement as true and correct and reveal your lie.

Sorry kts you lose again since you thought his sleight of hand (lie) would go unchallenged but unfortunately for you & stu he cannot change his previous posts .
More...
So what's the problem exactly?

You asked me if I know. I said Sure I know.
Then you asked me for evidence about my knowledge.
I make no claims about my knowledge.

So you call me a liar.
That's hardly anything like an intelligent response you have there is it.

Nothing new then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top