By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
WolfpackN64 on 23 August 2018
Edit Thread
JWeinCom said:
WolfpackN64 said:

That's just because of the nature of the argument. They're trying only to prove the existance of a God, not what the qualities of that God are. For that, Thomas Aquinas' arguments are of more use.

But, they don't prove the existence of a god.  Again, if you accept the premises, which I do not, they prove a cause.  There is no real justification for calling that cause god.

If you have an argument that actually does prove god I'd be open to it.  To my knowledge there has yet to be a sound one.

https://youtu.be/zYFUP_vZUCU

Also, if you're interested there's a good video of a PHD in philosophy discussing the Cosmological argument.

I do not expect these arguments to be accept as definitive arguments to God's existance by most people. At the very least, I hope people understand the subject matter is more complicated then "God doesn't exist because no proof".

And if you want to hear a very good inconclusive debate by two gentleman on the subject: (Copleston vs Bertrand Russel)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXPdpEJk78E