You don't want to answer the question? I'll at least answer yours then to say - that's entirely up to you. So you don't mind? What a relief. :-D
It's entirely up to you how your saying anything to a two year-old is materially affected. No, I didn't ask the question again, I asked if I should ask it again, seeing you hadn't replied. Now that you haven't answered my subsequent question, that of whether you wanted to answer the question in question, I don't question your apparent reluctance to answer it. I do however find it pretentious on your part. :-D Which bit would that be?
That question being who says it does in answer to my question how does saying it to a two year old materially affect what I said or defeat the definition of pretentious. Answer being you are challenging my statement about pretending being pretentious by definition, not the birthday girl for sure. You would have to fill me in on what you think is pretentious on my part since you think the word doesn't mean what it does or that it means something ungodly. I put the word ungodly there because it fits the time or the purported crime as it relates to points previously discussed. That would be whatever you found relief from. Glad you were able to take a mind dump.
Strange Notions............. http://www.strangenotions.com/god-exists/ if nothing else- -an interesting (and debatable) read
For those of you who haven't checked this out, the site presents no fewer than twenty arguments for the existence of God. The site is manned by Catholic apologists reaching out to atheists. I personally doubt that God can be proven by logical argument, but I've found some of the arguments persuasive. The reader might notice that none of the arguments establishes the existence of a deity like Yahweh or Allah.
I just glanced over them but none of the arguments I read establish the existence of a deity like Jesus either. Although I looked at some of the other articles and half hidden links lol on that site to see it obviously is a Christian biased website.
Why switch to the gods' problem now? Many Gods like many Lords causes the authority invested in the existing Time-passage. Nature is just having Spinoza, now, in Daniel's Lions' Den. Incidentally Nature IS GOD to Spinoza: well then the God of Beauty.
Spinoza wanted god to have continued meaning. He didn't grasp that one can't make nature ones god, that one is only ever ones own nature, not natures, that ones personal god has ones own personality however one sets it apart. Beauty overrules god. There is no real problem with this, and many imagined ones.
I am, what other? Why do you think that is less than straight? The azimuth you project is your own hard on and it is only right angled to you.
From what I have encountered, all those arguments have already been countered: 1. Logical Problem of Evil 2. Evidential Problem of Evil 3. Theistic Argument Against Apologetics 4. Argument from Divine Hiddenness 5. Cantorian Argument Against Omniscience 6. Problem of Heaven 7. Problem of Divine Freedom 8. Moral Argument for Atheism 9. Argument from Material Causality 10. Argument from Inconsistent Revelations 11. Euthyphro Dilemma 12. Platonic-Theodicy Dilemma (that's right, dropping in my own argument like a dick) 13. Reverse Modal Ontological Argument 14. Problem of Non-God Objects 15. Argument from Corruption 16. Ray Comfort, Kent Hovind and Ken Ham 17. The Imperfection of Scripture 18. Cosmological Argument for Atheism 19. Problems with God's attributes 20. Hume's Argument Against Miracles
I overrule its invocation, not just beauty. :-D The self would will its end rather than its subjugation, slave-driver. God exists for you, not I. If you were god, and you chose to exist for me, it would be another matter, remember? lol
Do you think it possible to encounter something new or different? Do you think that the effects of your own thinking might play a role in what you encounter in life? Does it occur to you it might not be possible to see what you don't look at? Your arguments don't provide any kind of solution because your conflict still exists. Does god exist?, wrong argument if you are arguing about god's existence that is phenomenological evidence of the existence of something to argue about. This argument appears in the form of ideas and the salient question or one that will bring solutions to fore is how does this phenomenological god appear to us? To you it appears a fundamental detriment to the world as if reality was tearing itself apart but you only tear at reality. The studious of life would not be so partisan against the evidence of his fellows the world over. You are then not so mainstream in correct apprehension but more raving lunatic fringe. This is an authority problem. What is authority, that which we invoke. Invoke: cite or appeal to (someone or something) as an authority for an action or in support of an argument, creator-creature
One could ask the same of you. After all, you are so stuck in your thinking that you cannot comprehend anything other than what you already have deluded yourself into believing. Think about it. Open-mindedness, is a two way street, though nothing should be accepted as real when there is no proof to support its existence. It is absolutely illogical to do so. Therefore, forgo with the fantasy and accept reality; god does not exist.
I guess it really is for you! You are torn between self and god! lol I laugh not at your predicament, but that it needn't be one! :-D Be yourself any way!
the booming voice of thedope! :-D What thing do you miss? We know you think something isn't physical, that's a start, in your own mind, but only for realizing it as error. lol. How comfortable is it for you?
Yes I do account for my own thinking, having and being are the same. Excuse me. What fantasy? I am not a theist not an atheist nor an agnostic, I am studious, a disciple. What doesn't exist, your appeal to authority? You are exposed to the core! We give the world all the meaning it has for us. Do you revere life? Again what doesn't exist?