Anselm's second proof

discredit Anselm's second proof from the Proslogion if you can:

That God Cannot be Thought Not to Exist

Originally posted by Doward
discredit Anselm's second proof from the Proslogion if you can:

That God Cannot be Thought Not to Exist

Funny, I just THOUGHT the bible god doesn't exist. I guess that proves THAT statement wrong right there.

fail!...next?

Originally posted by Doward
fail!...next?

I agree that you fail ... next indeed!

Originally posted by Doward
discredit Anselm's second proof from the Proslogion if you can:

That God Cannot be Thought Not to Exist

It cannot be discredited and is cast-iron proof of the
pinkest unicorn
lightest fairy
fattest father Christmas
and
the Perfection that is His Holiness The Flying Spaghetti Monster

Originally posted by Doward
discredit Anselm's second proof from the Proslogion if you can:

That God Cannot be Thought Not to Exist

It would help if you repeated the argument. I looked it up on Wikipedia, but the page on Proslogion does not specify which the proof they've given is. The "proof" there is as follows:

The argument (after Dr. Scott H. Moore's analysis)

(1) One can imagine a being than which none greater can be conceived.
(2) We know that existence in reality is greater than existence in the mind alone.
(3) If the being we imagine exists only in our mind, then it is not a "being than which none greater can be conceived".
(4) A being than which none greater can be conceived must also exist in reality.
(5) Failure to exist in reality would be failure to be a being than which none greater can be conceived.
(6) Thus a being than which none greater can be conceived must exist, and we call this being God.

Is it this argument that you mean?

If so then steps (4) and (5) are horrible.

Originally posted by DeepThought
It would help if you repeated the argument. I looked it up on Wikipedia, but the page on Proslogion does not specify which the proof they've given is. The "proof" there is as follows:

The argument (after Dr. Scott H. Moore's analysis)

(1) One can imagine a being than which none greater can be conceived.
(2) We know that existence ...[text shortened]... ing God.

Is it this argument that you mean?

If so then steps (4) and (5) are horrible.

Indeed. Step for is a misstep. How is that supposed to follow? The answer is, it DOESN'T.

Originally posted by Doward
discredit Anselm's second proof from the Proslogion if you can:

That God Cannot be Thought Not to Exist

2 Timothy 2:23 says, "Further, reject foolish debates..."
and Philippians 4:8 adds, "Finally, brothers, whatever things are true,......continue considering these things."
Psalms 14:1 says, "The foolish one says in his heart: "There is no God."
Hopefully, none are so foolish.

Originally posted by roigam
2 Timothy 2:23 says, "Further, reject foolish debates..."
and Philippians 4:8 adds, "Finally, brothers, whatever things are true,......continue considering these things."
Psalms 14:1 says, "The foolish one says in his heart: "There is no God."
Hopefully, none are so foolish.

These kinds of snippets of text can be used ~ perhaps ~ to urge or coerce conformity and compliance in a group or cult consisting of people who already hold Bible based beliefs, but they are of no relevance to people who do not subscribe to that particular literature. So your post is a variant of 'preaching to the choir'.

Originally posted by FMF
These kinds of snippets of text can be used ~ perhaps ~ to urge or coerce conformity and compliance in a group or cult consisting of people who already hold Bible based beliefs, but they are of no relevance to people who do not subscribe to that particular literature. So your post is a variant of 'preaching to the choir'.

Since his reply was to Doward I rather assumed that that was to whom the advice was directed.

Originally posted by DeepThought
Since his reply was to Doward I rather assumed that that was to whom the advice was directed.

I rather thought it was an ad hominem about being "foolish" rather than a genuine "reply" to the OP poster. But maybe you're right, maybe it's legitimate "advice". The question of what it actually is has been highlighted then. Good.

Originally posted by Doward
discredit Anselm's second proof from the Proslogion if you can:

That God Cannot be Thought Not to Exist

Right. But it is hoped that God does not exist. I mean, it is really really hoped that God doesn't exist. For obvious reasons. Imagine how the one that denies the existence of God will feel when they are actually called to give account of themselves before God. I think it will be something like extreme shock followed closely by a sudden realization of impending doom.

Hey, don't look at me, it wasn't my idea! 😛 It's in the Bible.

Originally posted by FMF
I rather thought it was an ad hominem about being "foolish" rather than a genuine "reply" to the OP poster. But maybe you're right, maybe it's legitimate "advice". The question of what it actually is has been highlighted then. Good.

I haven't noticed roigam ever respond to any posts except ones made by Christians. He tends not to involve himself in disputes with non-believers.

Originally posted by DeepThought
I haven't noticed roigam ever respond to any posts except ones made by Christians. He tends not to involve himself in disputes with non-believers.

I don't see what argument roigam was offering in the dispute. I just saw a lazy ad hominem-like-thing that sought to circumnavigate or perhaps stifle debate. 🙂

edit: He tends not to involve himself in disputes with non-believers.

Well, he has had some exchanges of views with me and I am a non-believer when it comes to his religious faith.

Originally posted by josephw
Hey, don't look at me, it wasn't my idea! 😛 It's in the Bible.

But in reality the world of unbelievers are "looking" you josephw; they look at what you believe, why you believe it and what impact it has on your attitudes and behaviour. Adopting an unpleasant religious belief and then saying "don't look at me, it's in the bible" is not endearing nor edifying for anyone.