Our logic is not absurd. Your perception is wrong.
No, your logic is absurd. Or more precisely, it is comically unparsimonious.
Also, your knowledge of science in the field of abiogenesis and the history and geography of territories is low.
That's rich.
I pointed out in this post
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=13962288#post13962288 that you don't really know what abiogenesis is. You used the term incorrectly in the post to which I was responding. It's only one of several scientific terms you've used in this thread alongside evidence that you have no idea what concepts lie behind them. You're not a scientist by any measure, and it's an ongoing insult to claim that you are the scientific teacher here. Many people here are highly scientifically literate, and a few of us are professionals. We can tell that you're faking it.
Abiogenesis is a set of theories and principles by which we postulate how life may have arisen from inanimate components. It seems to violate thermodynamics, which argues that matter devolves into less complex, less energetic forms over time. However, it is important to determine whether life can arise using only materials and processes we know existed on the primordial Earth.
That makes it all the more absurd when you try to tack a god onto it. If you say some god employed the principle of abiogenesis to create life, it's literally the least parsimonious way to approach that question. It takes a process specifically formulated to avoid supernatural or unprovable antecedents and forces it to carry one. To then turn around and insinuate that abiogenesis is somehow evidence of your god is patently absurd.
The existence of God is true.
Despite your belief to the contrary, you have not proven this proposition. In fact, your only attempts to prove it are circular reasoning. That said, this proposition is a premise to so many of your syllogisms. You are starting from the axiom that there exists a god. This will not work in a skeptics forum.
But it is not made of matter or the universe. The problem with your logic for God's existence is that you think God must have an objective reality like matter. But God is never like matter. It is not made of matter or the universe. Understand this point.
I understand the
claim, but this is all conjecture. More often than not, these propositional attributes are only put forward as a feeble rebuttal to the question of whether the existence of a god is scientifically testable, or even scrutable. That is, you make up new attributes of god every time you need a new way to claim that science cannot refute the existence of one.
I have already advised you to study the history of the prophets and their lands. But apparently, unfortunately, you don't study.
Nonsense. You keep insulting your critics with this ongoing believe that you are a superior scholar of religion and religious history. However, your critics are running rings around you. Most religions fanatics are surprised to learn how much more atheists know of their religion than they do. In fact, atheists often become atheist precisely
because they learn more about religion than the typical believer, and see all the things that the religious preachers leave out.
When I lived in Italy, I learned about Catholic Christianity from the neighborhood priest, who also arranged for me to be able to play several cathedral organs. I already knew Latin, but also studied ancient Greek and studied the New Testament in its original (or early) languages. I don't want to be Christian, or Catholic. But I want to learn about the people I lived among. I may be an atheist, but I am sensitive to deeply held beliefs.
When I lived in Jerusalem, I learned about Judaism from a rabbi who also taught me Hebrew. I read the Torah in its original languages, not because I wanted to be a Jew but because I was living among people for whom that was their cultural heritage.
When I lived in Heliopolis, I studied Islam with an Imam who had formerly been at the mosque of Muhammed Ali in Cairo. I didn't have time to learn much Arabic, but I have very fond memories of sitting on those beautiful carpets in that grand space reading the Qur'an. No, I don't want to become a Muslim, but I wanted to love my Muslim neighbors.
Now that I live in Utah, I've read the Book of Mormon a number of times and had many conversations with Mormon clergy, including one with the sitting Mormon prophet (Hinckley), who grew up only a five-minute walk from where I live now. Do I want to be a Mormon? No, but I need to understand what motivates my neighbors.
So you can kindly stop insulting people. It's clear you don't know anything about science or philosophy -- two of your favorite topics. But it's also becoming increasingly clear you don't know anything about religion beyond your fundamentalist indoctrination. I've studied far more about religion than you have.
If you don't deny the truth, you will understand many issues.
Sorry, browbeating people into accepting your illogical and arrogant claims won't work.
