The 'Mathematical Proof !!!'.. That JohnLArmstrong does not understand basic Logic.
Top Comments
All Comments (66)
-
John's argument is a logical not a mathematical argument. Yes, it uses a classic fallacy and is therefore, invalid. I'm with you. You then go on to say we know God is ... Huh?. You don't KNOW God is anything. Furthermore the idea of the trinity is silly. Trying to explain it logically is like trying to figure out how many angels would fit on the head of a pin. The foundation of your explanation is divine revelation recorded in a very flawed text. You have no argument at all.
-
Actually, this isn't propositional logic, it's a categorical syllogism (which is formally understood in the context of predicate logic).
-
deistpaladin
-
For the apple example.
Apple implies fruit (notice not biconditional)
Apple implies Red (not biconditional- not even a true statement)
By Venn diagram-not a valid argument.
-
Logic-Transitivity of the biconditional. Premise: A if and only if B B if and only if C Proof: A therefore B C therefore A implies C* C therefore B A therefore C implies A* therefore, A if and only if C I would suggest you look this up in a textbook if you don't understand transitivity.
-
Q: Is Jesus a being?
-
JohnLArmstrong is a deist idiot
this can be proven without math
LOL
-
i cant find that video
-
Oh...now it is poetic allegory. Will you guys please quit moving the target for your convenience?...and DP a bigot....please.
i like the analogy that H2O is water, ice and vapour.
water is not ice
ice is not vapour
and vapour is not water
but all are H2O. Simple
TheEcumenator 2 years ago 5
Wikipedia has a nice definition if you still don't understand transitivity:
In mathematics, a binary relation R over a set X is transitive if whenever an element a is related to an element b, and b is in turn related to an element c, then a is also related to c.
StewardOfEarth 2 years ago 3