/lit/ - Literature

>>23273720
probably moses because he talked to him you fucking retard

>>23273720
Me.

>>23273726
But was Moses a philosopher?

>>23273726
>Diomedes talked to Apollo therefore Apollo exists

>>23273720
Noone.

>>23273720
Plato. Plato already 'solved' everything from a Philosophic point of view. Everyone after is just a lesser version of Plato.

>>23273733
>not believing in apollo

lol

>>23273733
>it's possible to talk to things that don't exist
Retard

>philosophical argument
Fuck off

>>23273753
Yes it is. But that wasn't his claim you braindead jew worshipper.

>>23273720
Arguments from intuition are all the rage now.

>>23273750
>Plato already 'solved' everything from a Philosophic point of view.
Have you read the Parmenides? Also, why did Plato's academy become a skeptic school? Makes you wonder

theists are no different than kids arguing about goku vs superman. most useless faggot shit. i hate you low iq niggers so much its unreal. get a real hobby

George Berkeley

>>23273850
It's no different from physicists arguing about which theory best "explains" the universe.

baruch spinoza

>>23273720
Descartes used the same argument as Anselm.

>>23273720
What is "God"?

>>23273850
you have to be 18 to post here

>>23273720
St. Augustine, unironically.

>>23273720
Plotinus

>>23273863
of course a theist nigger would try to hack out all nuance in an attempt to latch onto their betters.
>>23273880
i wish we had an iq requirement

>>23273934
Not trying to latch onto anything lol. It's a you problem that you consider the sophistry of "theoretical physics" to be of any value at all except as a way to stroke some itch

I'm seeing a lot of answers but no justifications or reasons to support them

>>23273943
in the context of physicists? there is. meanwhile people who chose to opt out of academia (and most real life competition) find tales to lord over people. judging everyone with rules for a game they arent playing

>>23273850
>most useless faggot shit.
As opposed to what?

>>23273850
>theists are no different than kids arguing about goku vs superman. most useless faggot shit. i hate you low iq niggers so much its unreal. get a real hobby

>>23273948
pretend you're a muslim, ok? now lets continue this discussion. why not?
>>23273949
>wojak concession

>>23273947
>there is.
To a very small extent. Other than that, not really. It's just a collection of fads.
>meanwhile people who chose to opt out of academia (and most real life competition) find tales to lord over people
So they aren't opting out of "real life competition"? You are not very smart. Also, does the belief that science or physicalism is the one true path and tbat one should always refer to scientists in all matters fall under tales to lord over people? Why do you also think that "lording over people" is bad? Are you a libertarian or something?

>>23273964
no, you're assuming too much. do i have to rewind through every one of these? fuck no.

some people work for things in life. there's also an openness to change, a practical goal and an emphasis of evidence. all things peaching theists lack.
some people are fucking animals who still find a way to look down on others, even if it's not based on reality and is contradicting another billion or so peoples beliefs.

mind you, im pooling (you) in with any muslim or hindu. because why should you assume any moral superiority?

and for what it's worth, faith is cool. community is great. sure.
making it your duty to be right about this shit is disgusting. (re: OP)

>>23273958
Ok I'm pretending I'm a Muslim. I enjoy contemplating the oneness of Allah, which you say is "useless faggot shit". So tell me: what would actually be useful, and what is the criteria for determining usefulness?

>>23274067
before we do that, imagine that a 1/3rd of all threads (some days) on /lit/ are now about muslim shit. these guys are shitting on philosophers, authors, etc. that oppose/contradict their funny views.
meanwhile there's a /mus/ board, yea? and i'm in here to talk about books and there are like 100 muslims shitting up every thread. yea? that's you.

again, regarding the OP:
>which philosopher...
instantly, /his/ thread
>argument for god's existence
again, doubled up on /his/ topics

sorry, back to what you were asking:
it's just my opinion, man. that's why i chimed in to begin with. and im trying to have you see it through my eyes. hence goku vs superman debate. how is this something worth spending your time on? it's not that to you, and that's cool. but see my above issue with the posts

>>23273720
Not him, that's for sure.

>>23273850

>>23274122
>unable to articulate an argument so he misattributes some fallacy
uh... based

>>23273946
Welcome to theology.

>>23274112
Fair enough.

>>23274124

>>23273720

>god
dun't exist

>>23274271
>"God does not exist" said God

>>23273726
so does a random tinfoil schizo from texas claim every single day too. whats your point?

>>23273858
Had to scroll WAY too low for this post

Based king. Dr. Johnson was wrong about Berkley.

>>23273878
>>23273946
>>23274271
>>23273850
>>23273741

Look here: >>23274264

Pascal

>>23274323
If I were God, I would only sentence to infinite hell people who only believed in me and behaved well because of Pascal

>>23273934
Scholastics and mystics were not comparable to Marvel or DC slop you absolute child. Man if I ever saw you in real life I’d throttle your underage ass.

>>23273947
This is what should happen to academics

>>23274443
liberals believe in the existence of black people who don't steal, but they won't believe in their own creator

>>23273720
philosophical proofs of God are unnecessary. Jesus Christ undeniably fulfilled Old Testament prophecies. you can either write it off as an incredibly large and improbable number of coincidences, or you can admit that the Bible contains the absolute truth.

>>23273720
Define god

>>23274616
This is the thing. People who ask this question need to do that before they do anything else, yet rarely do they do so.

>>23273720
St. Thomas Aquinas with the advantage of a good millennium of the West's greatest minds to draw from produced to date the strongest arguments for God's existence. While not the easiest to comprehend, these arguments all start from some fact about reality to the conditions that immediately follow which show God as necessary, hence, unlike the worthless word games of a rationalist such as Decartes, their conclusions are grounded in empirical observation about reality in terms of metaphysical insight. They are not going to convince he who refuses to be convinced, but they are irrefutable and show why belief in the Almighty God is not only perfectly rational but absolutely necessary given the full weight of reality.

>>23274551

Anybody can fulfill prophecies if they are recorded after the fact. You just change the prediction to match what happened.

>>23274668
>>23274616

>>23274264

>>23273720
Apostle Paul
>“His invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made.”—ROM. 1:20.

>>23273720
Spinoza was a acosmist. Nothing to do with what we call God.

>>23273720
Anton LeVay

>>23273949
I look like this and say this

>>23274379
Makes you a retard