Do you believe in God? Why/Why not?

[WolfpackN64]

JWeinCom said:

WolfpackN64 said:

I'm still following along the deductive lines. I first started deductively, switched it to an inductive reasoning somewhere explaining the argument again. Granted, it was sloppy, but I believe I switched tracks when we started debating epistomology and knowledge. That was a sidetrack, I'm still seeing this as a deductive argument.

And yes, the conclusion does follow the premises. I only accepted people could not agree with the conclusion. Which does not make the argument invalid.

You are again saying two contradictory things.

If it is a deductive argument that is indeed valid, then I could not accept the premises and deny the conclusion, unless I am myself being irrational, which doesn't seem to be what you're implying.

So, I'm going to go ahead and accept the five premises.  If I accept all of those as true, do I now have to believe that God exists as a necessary being?  If not, the conclusion does not necessarily follow the premises, and the argument is invalid. 

An argument can be valid in two ways. It can be formally valid, because it's a proper deductive argument. And it can be factually valid, because the premisses and conclusions are actually true.

That the cosmological argument is formally valid is not in question. The only question is if it is factually valid. Which I hold it is.