WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2024 Poal.co

721

Regarding the question of whether there is a God, there are exactly two Logical positions.

  1. I know there is a God

  2. I do not know if there is a God

All other positions require Belief, and this definitely includes Atheism.

In addition to this simple axiom, there is also something else to consider:

If you are able to formulate the question of whether there is a God, there is an omnipresent candidate for God which can not be excluded.

Atheism is a dark and diabolical Mind Prison. To escape, just use the key of Logic to set yourself free and let your mind shine.

For the record: I posted this in s/Tellpoal. This is about Logic, and not the Social Construct of Religion.

Regarding the question of whether there is a God, there are exactly two Logical positions. 1. I know there is a God 2. I do not know if there is a God All other positions require Belief, and this definitely includes Atheism. In addition to this simple axiom, there is also something else to consider: If you are able to formulate the question of whether there is a God, there is an omnipresent candidate for God which can not be excluded. Atheism is a dark and diabolical Mind Prison. To escape, just use the key of Logic to set yourself free and let your mind shine. For the record: I posted this in s/Tellpoal. This is about Logic, and not the Social Construct of Religion.

(post is archived)

[–] 1 pt

That's not an example of Strawman. You arguing that it is a Strawman then wanting to turn the argument to that instead of the point made [that simply mentioning something doesn't create it] is a Strawman.

Incorrect. My statement is specific and unambiguous. You are attempting to replace this specific thing with something else, and then argue about that. This is precisely what a Strawman Argument is.

[–] 0 pt

But, back to the dildo that is lodged in your ass... like your god, can you prove that it doesn't exist?