My challenge to all who oppose me

[Makeen]

I started a new topic perhaps (I never intended to) I have done something against forum rules. Maybe a mod can fix this up. Sorry about that.

Anyway basically I have approached another angle of proving the existence of god a little similar to my last argument. It is as follows:

a - When we discover something true, we have discovered truth
b - For truth to be discovered, it must exist.
c - Truth therefore exists before it is discovered
d - Truth that exists before it is discovered is truth that has been applied
e - Truth that is applied is known

Argument 1: "I don't agree that for truth to be discovered it must exist".

Answer: How can you deny such simple logic? If there is an Island and I discover it, the Island had to be there before I discover it

Argument 2: "Can you please elaborate on what you mean by Truth that exists before it is discovered has been applied. I don't agree with that and it doesn't make sense to me for me to agree with it"

Answer: Let us refer to the simple truth, "Fire burns". If that simple truth has not been applied then why does fire burn? Why does that truth apply?

-Makeen

[peterpin]

Makeen, why on earth should you not start a topic if you want to?

Now about capturing God with logic, let me tell you that many people have tried that over many centuries, and none were successful.

I am happy about that, for two simple reasons.

If the existence of God was a matter of established knowledge, then our knowledge must be superior to God, because it has managed to nail him down. This would mean as soon as we capture God with logic, by definition God ceases to exist, and we would have found something superior to God.

The other problem is this: Imagine life with an "in your face" God, an empirically known God. It would be like you could see God sitting next to you on the sofa, sitting on the end of your bed when you are with your wife... You would have not even a hint of free choice.

God does not want us to disect him, he wants us to LOVE him. Real love is something freely given. So God will be discreet, quiet, inviting, never pushing or forcing.

[Methinx]

I started a new topic perhaps (I never intended to) I have done something against forum rules. Maybe a mod can fix this up. Sorry about that.

Anyway basically I have approached another angle of proving the existence of god a little similar to my last argument. It is as follows:

a - When we discover something true, we have discovered truth
b - For truth to be discovered, it must exist.
c - Truth therefore exists before it is discovered
d - Truth that exists before it is discovered is truth that has been applied
e - Truth that is applied is known

Argument 1: "I don't agree that for truth to be discovered it must exist".

Answer: How can you deny such simple logic? If there is an Island and I discover it, the Island had to be there before I discover it

Argument 2: "Can you please elaborate on what you mean by Truth that exists before it is discovered has been applied. I don't agree with that and it doesn't make sense to me for me to agree with it"

Answer: Let us refer to the simple truth, "Fire burns". If that simple truth has not been applied then why does fire burn? Why does that truth apply?

-Makeen

Truth is quality of Reality, not Logic.
.