Re: Proof of God's existence?

"Tarald Andresen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Formulating it for the purpose of rational analysis, though, can be
> > another
> > > matter. Personally, I sure have had some hard times wrestling with
these
> > > concepts, trying to find that particular usage of them that serves my
> > > purpose...
> >
> > ?????????
> > You're looking for the perfect mind game to convince yourself you've
> proven
> > god?
> >
> > IF you ever find it, you will have only convinced yourself.
> > Science, and reality, need a lot more than mind game arguments and
> > irrational intuition.
>
> So, if your so rational, why don't you give me some arguments about my
text
> instead of these personal outburst?


Because, honestly - and not trying to be disrespectful - your text, after
trying to read it several times, appeared, to me, to be nothing more than
babble.

You indicated, in the introduction, a proof akin to a mathematical
certainty. There was no mathematics, mathematical logic, or certainty about
any of it. It was, at best, a philosophical exercise.
Now ... if you DID put it in a way that a logical mathematician, or just a
logical person, could understand it ... then there would be something to
rebut.