Thanks for your open-ness to my thoughts.

Now, I have this concept of God in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, as follows:

"God is the creator of everything in the universe that is not Himself."

And I have this concept of the universe, as follows:

"The universe is the totality of existence where we live in and are parts of. as also everything existing exists in, even imaginary things but subjects of man's discourse."

You will notice that my concept of universe is much more expansive than the observable to man universe which is in turn a part of the expanded universe.

From my stock knowledge that was the concept of the universe until today when people make a distinction between the observable universe and the not-observable universe, but to be logical people will agree that both universes make up one universe, which I will call the totality of existence when I use the term universe.

Now, where does God come in, in this universe which is the totality of existence?

If God exists He is also a part of this universe, namely, the totality of existence.

That is where God comes in if He does exist, because I say that the universe is the totality of existence containing everything at all which does exist, even imaginable things which are the subjects of human discourse.

[quote=Niko] Niko(115) 2 points

Sorry, maybe I'm confused, but you say that we can resolve the God debate if we accept that Christians believe, I repeat, believe, that God exists because of an unproven statement that God created everything there is except Himself. You haven't proven its validity in any way.

If you could please, would you explain how knowing what Christians believe proves that what they believe exists?

5 days ago | Tagged As: Proof please

[/quote]

before anything else, I say I am the author of this thread, what I mean is that I started this topic here in this CreateDebate forum, namely;

[quote=Marius]

[ Post 1 ]

Title of Topic: How to prove God is the creator of the observable universe.

I am a Christian.

To resolve the God debate, I invite atheists to first come to the correct concept of God in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, which is as follows:

"Creator of everything in the universe that is not God Himself."

That is the correct concept of God in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the totality of existence which I understand by the concept of the universe.

Do you atheists know of that concept of God in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe?

If you do not know that concept of God, then insofar as the Christian God is concerned you are in denying God's existence barking up the wrong tree at the wrong God.

Now, if you know the correct God in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, which is: God is the creator of everything in the universe that is not God Himself, then we can resolve the God debate and you will come to accept the existence of God.

Marius

[/quote]

That is the OP or first initiating post from the author of this debate topic which in other forums is called a thread.

I really must apologize for not using the codes here to make my writing more in accordance with the codes, but I am still looking for a page in this website where the codes are listed and examples of each given.

It is actually my intention to start a new debate topic as soon as everyone has agreed on concepts and rules, and as a matter of fact in order to quench the thirst of atheists who already wanted to plunge right away into disproving the existence of God, I did start a new topic but the powers that be here in effect required me to continue in the present topic, so I am now simultaneously getting people to agree on concepts and rules and also presenting my thoughts to show how God does exist in the totality of existence, which is my understanding of the universe, which universe is bigger than the observable to man universe.

Okay Niko, you ask:

"If you could please, would you explain how knowing what Christians believe proves that what they believe exists?"

First, if you know the correct information of the concept of God in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, which is that:

"God is the creator of everything in the universe that is not God Himself,"

and second, if you agree with me to understand the universe as the totality of existence which contains also the observable to man universe,

then we can go forward in the totality of existence to look for God the creator of everything in the universe that is not Himself.

And where do we look for God, or where do we start to look for God?

The question that atheists always ask is where is the evidence for God, so we will look for evidence for God in the observable to man universe; it cannot be otherwise since we cannot know the rest of the universe outside that portion we call and know to be the observable to man universe.

Do you follow me?

What I will do next, even though you atheists want to rush things and that is what I call haste is waste, what I will do next is to present propositions and also ask you atheists here to present propositions, and we work to agree to accept the propositions coming from us both.

That is the way to go to resolve the God debate, by agreeing on propositions one by one, instead of bringing in so many things to no purpose but to muddle up the issue or to divert it to all kinds of endless repetitious controversies.

[quote=Rage]

ReventonRage(73) Disputed 1 point

the topic here is on the need of atheists to come to the correct concept of God in the Christian faith

Disagree, because that is not the topic of debate in the thread (which you rudely interrupted) between the myself and the person who claimed that "science knows everything". Again, I repeat, If you want to debate against me on whether God exists, I gladly oblige. But let's do that debate elsewhere, by not replying to this thread.

Now, tell everyone here what is your information of the concept of God in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, and mind you just the information because I want to see whether you got the correct information

I think that you must have been blind till now because I have clearly stated, in my first post to this debate, that I agree with your conception of what the Christian opinion of "God" means and what the universe means.

Now as regards your concept of what it is to prove something to exist in objective reality, please come up with just five examples of your having proven something to exist in objective reality in your own lifetime so far.

See my other post.

Pick one concept of evidence that is to your intelligence most is the most relevant to the God debate.

I have told you. The concept of evidence I subscribe to is one that is scientifically and philosophically proven as undeniable fact that serves to support an argument.

[/quote]

----------------

Dear Rave, I am the author of this thread, and if you want to debate with someone else on something that is between you two, produce your own thread and do it in your own thread.

The topic here is on the need of atheists to come to the correct concept of God in the Christian faith, and also all concepts crucially involved in the God debate, as likewise rules for everyone to abide by.

Now, tell me -- even though you say you did it already -- what is your concept of God in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe; don't say again that you told me already, just tell me now, and I promise you I will remember it and know where to look for it when i need it again.

I am asking you to give me five examples of things you have proven to exist, and so far I am not seeing any examples from you of your own experiences.

It is some trouble to navigate this forum, but suppose you now tell me those five or more examples, then I will remember them and know where I can find them again.

You say: "I have told you. The concept of evidence I subscribe to is one that is scientifically and philosophically proven as undeniable fact that serves to support an argument."

That is a most verbose and varicose formulation of a concept of evidence, suppose you also give just five examples of evidence from your own experiences of evidence "that serves to support an argument."

That should give more light to your verbose and varicose formulation of what is evidence, and I will be able to draft it in a concise, precise statement as to economise on convoluted wording.

And I promise you that I will remember them your examples of evidence, and know where to look them up again should I want to quote them.

So, will you now contribute your thoughts on the items above mentioned here in order to contribute to this thread that I am the author of, instead of bringing in authorities and authorities to divert the topic into arguments on what your authorities are saying.

Marius

Dear Rave, the topic here is on the need of atheists to come to the correct concept of God in the Christian faith, and also to come to concurring concepts which are most crucially involved in the God debate, and also to come to concurring rules all parties must adhere to.

Many things have been brought up already but they are not into the topic, and I am myself also diverted into producing arguments to prove the existence of God, that is the mother issue; but we are or I want everyone in this instant topic to first come to concurrence on concepts and rules.

So far I think I am succeeding in getting people to get the correct information of the concept of God in the Christine faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, which is:

"God is the creator of everything in the universe which is not God Himself."

Now, I seem to see that people are also into coming to concurrence on what is the concept of the universe we will accept for the purpose of the God debate, notwithstanding that many things are brought up which are not into the concept of the universe, like God being outside and it is impossible, whatever, etc.

Those things will have to come afterwards in as many topics as are needed to examine the interactions of God with the universe.

Here is my concept of the universe:

"The totality of existence where man lives in and is a part of, as also everything existing exists in, even things only imaginable and the subjects of man's discourse."

And as regards the rules to abide by for everyone, my first rule is that:

"In the God debate keep to the universe the one where man lives in and where he sees the sun in the morning, the moon at night, the stars beyond our earth and also the distant galaxies and everything else that he can see in the observable universe which is a part of the universe as the totality of existence.

So, please contribute to the actual topic, and produce your ideas which are your very own even though borrowed but appropriated and assimilated as your very own, no need to bring in Hume, and also dictionaries -- if you know the words and use them, you have already your concepts of the things you use the words to talk about.

Okay?

Now, tell everyone here what is your information of the concept of God in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, and mind you just the information because I want to see whether you got the correct information: no no no no I am not trying to trap you into assuming that God is the creator of everything etc.

Just get the correct information of God in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe.

So also with your concept of what is the universe.

Now as regards your concept of what it is to prove something to exist in objective reality, please come up with just five examples of your having proven something to exist in objective reality in your own lifetime so far.

Then you can also search your mind on what is your concept of evidence; and don't go to the dictionaries.

If you don't know what is evidence in your stock knowledge, then keep quiet until you have already searched your mind and if there is really nothing about evidence in your mind, then study the dictionaries and adopt one and reproduce that one concept from the dictionaries but IN YOUR OWN WORDS, and don't bother to bring in the name of the dictionaries you have examined, because now you have your own concept of what is evidence.

Pick one concept of evidence that is to your intelligence most is the most relevant to the God debate.

You give your concept of what it is to prove something exists in objective reality, now give just five examples of your having proven something to exist in objective reality in our own lifetime.

If you have never ever proven anything at all, keep quiet.

If however you have already at least proven something to exist in objective reality, produce them here.

Okay, if you in fact have never ever so far in your lifetime proven something to exist in objective reality, take up the practice and then when you have accumulated just five, produce them here, and I will gain from your experiences, okay?

Otherwise, keep quiet, you are just into continuously derailing the topic.

Dear Zombie, please read my OP again:

[qoute=Marius]How to prove God is the creator of the observable universe.

I am a Christian.

To resolve the God debate, I invite atheists to first come to the correct concept of God in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, which is as follows:

"Creator of everything in the universe that is not God Himself."

That is the correct concept of God in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the totality of existence which I understand by the concept of the universe.

Do you atheists know of that concept of God in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe?

If you do not know that concept of God, then insofar as the Christian God is concerned you are in denying God's existence barking up the wrong tree at the wrong God.

Now, if you know the correct God in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe, which is: God is the creator of everything in the universe that is not God Himself, then we can resolve the God debate and you will come to accept the existence of God.

Marius

[/quote]

Of course, you can see through my OP that I have an argument against atheists' contention against God if they are directing themselves against the Christian God, but I am still in my OP inviting atheists to come to the correct information about the concept of the Christian God in His fundamental relation to the universe.

You see, atheists the ones who write against God, gods, goddesses, deities, divinities, must pick one of these entities to focus their arguments on, but I see they just keep on attacking without any specific target, and that is irrational.

So, I am asking all atheists and everyone keen on the God debate to agree to the following propositions I have presented, and you can find them at the end of this webpage or at the end of the last webpage:

[quote=Marius] Marius(16) 1 point

[ I don't know how this message is going to come out, but I just want to address everyone, not to support or to dispute anyone. ]

-------------------

Okay, everyone here, from the start this is what I have chosen to do here, a Perspectives Debate.

-----------------------

http://www.createdebate.com/about/faq

Debate Types

What is a For/Against Debate?

What is a Perspectives Debate?

A Perspectives Debate is an open question where the positions are tracked by tags. Perspective Debates are best used for an issue that can't be broken down easily in to two sides, such as "What's the greatest band ever? By default, any CreateDebate user can post in a Perspectives Debate.

-----------------------

I have said earlier that I would be presenting some propositions for us all to agree to, in order that we can get closer to the actual debate on God's existence or non-existence, and not be talking past each others' heads.

Here are the propositions, not all of them but the ones that I can see to be most important for us all to agree to:

1. We must agree to work together to come to concurring on concepts most crucially involved in the God debate, and also to concurring on rules which all will abide by.

2. We must agree on a concurring concept of God, though not admitting the existence of the God corresponding to the agreed on concept of God.

3. We must agree on a concurring concept of the universe.

4. We must agree on a concurring concept of what it is to prove the existence of something.

5. We must agree on a concurring concept of what is evidence.

6. We must agree to abide by the rule that God's existence or non-existence is in reference to only the universe where we live in and are parts of, and where we see also the stars and even the distant galaxies and other components making up the universe.

These are my proposed concepts to agree on, and with #6 one rule so far that I am proposing we all agree to abide by.

Now, everyone if you have any propositions that you desire must be agreed on by everyone, on concepts and also rules, please present them in your posts.

1 day 18hrs ago[/quote]

Now you after after citing dictionaries.

You use the language yourself as to make yourself intelligible to others with the same language.

So, if you have any understanding of the words you are using like God, universe, proof, evidence, don't bring in dictionaries, tell people what are your concepts of those things: God, universe, prrof, evidence, proof, whatever; because dictionaries are made by people who are also using the same language we are using.

You must be able to express what your concepts are, as to be understood relevantly in the instant discourse, like for example if the discourse is about filling in a form where an applicant for a job has to write down information about his biodata and curriculum vitae, to the blank on sex he writes three times a week, then in the interview asked where he lives he answers in a house; that is not being relevant in giving your definitions of words, which you don't have to bring in the dictionaries to do so.

You are to all appearances a person of authority meaning you lean on authorities, without authorities you have nothing of your own thinking and writing.

Rage, I had sent this message to you but it has not come out for as I clicked on send what happened is that an instruction to login again appeared on my screen, afterwards I could not find the message below as sent already, so I am sending it again to you.

----------------------

I propose you don't bring in Hume, the man is dead.

If you have appropriated any of his ideas, just use them as coming from yourself without any reference to his name, because in referring to his name you are in effect telling people that you represent Hume but you don't, besides the man is dead; additionally you are disclosing to people today alive and here that you have no ideas at all from your very own mind, even if originally you read from others but appropriated and assimilated as to be your very own.

If you got your ideas from Hume and you believe them to be good for you as to be your own, just use your own words to tell what you know to be good for your own self, again without bringing in Hume's name.

If the ideas you have appropriated from Hume are not good enough for people today alive and here, as you express them in your own words without bringing in Hume, it is a gimmick for you to bring in his name because you are then appealing to authority; but you don't have any ideas except authority from a dead writer, and writers are a dime a dozen -- again if you think Hume's ideas are good to yourself, make them your own and reproduce them in your own very words without bringing in the name of Hume.

You will say that you have to use his words because otherwise you might not express them correctly, in which case you are admitting in effect that you yourself don't know what the dead man was talking about in his words uttered when he was alive.

So, don't bring in Hume and his ideas since you yourself don’t understand them.

Again, if you find Hume's ideas good for yourself, appropriate them and present them without bringing in Hume's name, in your own words; if they are good for yourself they can be good also for others who have also their own mind to judge the ideas on their own merits, not on any merits of a dead writer who cannot anymore be present to advance in his thoughts and discoveries of life and the world.

--------------------

Now, I hope this message come out, if not then there is some bug here.

I will respond to your other replies here, if this site works all right after I test if to see whether it has stabilized.

I am still looking for my last reply to Rage, and I can't find it yet, because I was interrupted in sending my last reply to Rage with an instruction to login again, while I was logging in again and succeeded in logging in again, the page has changed.

Anyway, I am not sure what is your purpose here, but I am into not exactly the debate as a tit for tat, but into debate as I said in my original first post to first come to agreement on concept and rules, but almost everyone here wants to plunge right away into proving or disproving God existing.

So, I am asking you to tell if I have already told you, about my proposed six propositions for everyone to work on about agreeing to, starting with the first one, namely, to agree that we must come first to concurring concepts and rules.

Now I will go back to look for my reply to Rage which is about telling him not to bring in Hume in this present conversation because the man is dead, and if he has appropriated ideas from the man, just present them as his own in his own words, no need to parade Hume at all; if the ideas are good on their own merits, so they are good and people can see them to be good, if not then bringing in Hume is an irrelevancy at best and at worst trying to lean on authority.

Have you read this earlier post from me:

----------------------------

@EnigmaticMan

So matter is the only thing in the universe, and therefore matter and the universe are identical, do I get you correctly?

And what is your concept of the universe, as also again your concept of matter, be concise, precise, and definitive.

Thanks for finding me agreeable, I try my best to express my thoughts about the existence of God which I submit for myself with a reason is obvious.

But to prove it to another person it takes concepts and words, that is where people can argue forever, and that is why I always ask people to first agree to come to mutually agreed on concepts and also to mutually agreed on rules in the exchange of thoughts, for otherwise people will be talking past each others' heads, which is irrational and what we call crazy.

What is your concept of God in the Christian faith in His fundamental relation to the universe?

Here again is my concept of God:

"God is the creator of everything in the universe that is not God Himself."

And here is my concept of the universe:

"The universe is the totality of existence where we humans live in and are parts of, so also everything that exists or can exist, and even imaginary things subjects of man's discourse; the observable to man universe is just a part of the total universe."

And here is my first rule for the viability of our conversation:

"Please keep to the universe where we are living in and seeing the components of even though we don't see everything at all in the universe, but we do see the stars, the distant galaxies, etc."

-----------------------

Just keep this paragraph in mind:

-------------------

"But to prove it to another person it takes concepts and words, that is where people can argue forever, and that is why I always ask people to first agree to come to mutually agreed on concepts and also to mutually agreed on rules in the exchange of thoughts, for otherwise people will be talking past each others' heads, which is irrational and what we call crazy."

--------------------

Now, I will ask you whether you agree to the following propositions, starting with #1:

------------------

I have said earlier that I would be presenting some propositions for us all to agree to, in order that we can get closer to the actual debate on God's existence or non-existence, and not be talking past each others' heads.

Here are the propositions, not all of them but the ones that I can see to be most important for us all to agree to:

1. We must agree to work together to come to concurring on concepts most crucially involved in the God debate, and also to concurring on rules which all will abide by.

2. We must agree on a concurring concept of God, though not admitting the existence of the God corresponding to the agreed on concept of God.

3. We must agree on a concurring concept of the universe.

4. We must agree on a concurring concept of what it is to prove the existence of something.

5. We must agree on a concurring concept of what is evidence.

6. We must agree to abide by the rule that God's existence or non-existence is in reference to only the universe where we live in and are parts of, and where we see also the stars and even the distant galaxies and other components making up the universe.

These are my proposed concepts to agree on, and with #6 one rule so far that I am proposing we all agree to abide by.

Now, everyone if you have any propositions that you desire must be agreed on by everyone, on concepts and also rules, please present them in your posts.

------------------------

Now, you will say that I am repeating things, that is your observation and it is correct in those instances where I do repeat things, but what you would like to see is that we argue forever and ever and ever, and that is not of any value but to be all wasteful with our time and energy and bandwidth.

I can see that there are people who are not sincerely into resolving a debate but into endless argumentations, and you can see that yourself if you notice that they don't want -- and they even oppose or impede -- to come to agreement on concepts and rules, and also they will resort continuously to muddle up the issue and to divert it to irrelevant questions.