Why the biblical atheist deny God exists.

@yrger This has been explained to you before in other posts. Just because your logic is circular does not mean I am going to debate in circles and answer the same questions again and again.

@ViciDraco

Hi ViciDraco. I can't make out what you are referring to, please specify what you explained to me in other posts.

@ViciDraco

yrger · 80-89, M
Hi everyone and in particular atheists here, what is the fallacy of the socalled circular logic?


First, it is not a fallacy, except to atheists who do not think and act correctly.


Let us suppose that a stranger states: "The dog is similar to a wolf." Then he turns his statement around and says: "The wolf is similar to a dog."

"The dog is similar to a wolf."
"The wolf is similar to a dog."

That according to atheists who do not know how to think and to act correctly, that is the fallacy of circular logic, because the two statements do not state anything new.


Hi readers, you see, the stranger is first describing the wolf or the dog, so that another stranger who does not know what a wolf lools like or a dog looks like, he can now use the description of the dog or the wolf, now go to the objectve reality outside his mind to look for the wolf or the dog, having now known what a wolf or a dog looks like, i.e. look for the concrete existence of the dog or the wolf.


The error of atheists is that they don't go to the objcetive reality to look for evidence of God in the say neighborhood, where we can see babies and roses which are ultimately created by God.

@ViciDraco yrger · 80-89, M
Hi everyone and in particular atheists here, what is the fallacy of the socalled circular logic?


First, it is not a fallacy, except to atheists who do not think and act correctly.


Let us suppose that a stranger states: "The dog is similar to a wolf." Then he turns his statement around and says: "The wolf is similar to a dog."

"The dog is similar to a wolf."
"The wolf is similar to a dog."

That according to atheists who do not know how to think and to act correctly, that is the fallacy of circular logic, because the two statements do not state anything new.


Hi readers, you see, the stranger is first describing the wolf or the dog, so that another stranger who does not know what a wolf lools like or a dog looks like, he can now use the description of the dog or the wolf, now go to the objectve reality outside his mind to look for the wolf or the dog, having now known what a wolf or a dog looks like, i.e. look for the concrete existence of the dog or the wolf.


The error of atheists is that they don't go to the objcetive reality to look for evidence of God in the say neighborhood, where we can see babies and roses which are ultimately created by God.