Regarding the Existence or Absence of God

Discussion in 'Politics' started by rs7, Aug 29, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Actually I did.

    Your are choosing to ignore the obvious.

    If I were god and wanted to prove to you
    that I was omniscient, I would simply come to
    you and claim, HEY! IM OMNISCIENT/OMNIPOTENT
    AND CAN PROVE IT!
    ASK ME ANYTHING or ASK ME TO DO ANYTHING.

    After asking god to do, oh say, 1000 impossible things,
    would this not be enough proof for you?

    You would only have to catch god being wrong ONCE
    about anything to prove that he was not omniscient.

    You would only have to catch god not being capable
    of doing something ONCE to prove he was not omnipotent.

    1) Make the solar system cease to exist, except for you
    and me. POOF its gone.

    2) Guess the roll of this next dice throw.
    He does it. And again and again....

    3) For 10 seconds, allow me to know the answers to
    all questions.

    and so on and so on.

    This would convince anyone quite quickly.

    There is your answer.
    If you dont think this would be proof enough, please
    explain why in detail.

    peace axeman



     
    #1591     Sep 26, 2002

  2. BINGO rs7!

    It would only prove he is capable of turning water to wine.

    To test for god, the participants must FIRST agree on a
    definition of god, and a fair test which would prove
    that the person was god.

    If we defined god as someone who is capable of zapping
    galaxies in and out of existence with the snap of his finger,
    then we could test this hypothesis and find out.

    If you defined god as someone who can turn water into
    wine, then you WOULD have found your god.
    Not a very impressive one, but one nonetheless.

    I would go for the most impressive definition I could find
    and test THAT one :D

    peace

    axeman
     
    #1592     Sep 26, 2002
  3. None of us exist? Would you like to attempt to argue
    that you dont exist? From what position are you
    arguing? Non-existence? :D

    Obviously things exist that cant be perceived
    by our "natural" senses. Thats why we enhance
    them with technology. Thats just stating the obvious.

    I dont see your point. What are you trying to imply?
    Please summarize your position for us and
    re-state it so we dont have to re-read 250+pages.

    Sorry...but I didnt memorize them all.

    Also... I wont bother responding to anymore posts
    that contain the word fucking so many times.

    Ad Hominem attacks do nothing but show a weak
    emotional position.

    peace

    axeman



     
    #1593     Sep 26, 2002
  4. the real question is, 'Boat, what are we justified in believing? are we justified in believing god exists? FUCK NO!

    you people are truly unbelievable in the lengths you will go to try and keep the god idea alive.

    no matter how many fuckin times i ask for it, NOBODY is willing to put his hand up and give me a definition of this god! nobody!
    and yet, you are all so fuckin convinced that such a god exists; or are fence-sitters like 'Boat, who likes to think that there's a possiblity this "god" exists, without even knowing the properties of the being who's existance he claims is possible.

    how can you claim to have knowledge of this god, and yet are unable to define him???? HOW, I ASK YOU?????

    'Boat, you know what's crazy about you? you claim not to believe in the god of the bible, or the god of religion, but you are yet to tell me from where you derived the idea of god IF NOT FROM RELIGION!!!!!!!!

    you keep wanting to keep the idea of god alive, but you don't even know anything about the properties of the god who's existance you like to maintain is possible. when this is pointed out to you, you bash our "limited knowledge" (as if anyone is saying man has unlimited knolwedge).

    if there ARE things that require more senses than our "limited' five, obviously we won't know about them. so if a god that is beyond these five senses, beyond all reasonable logic (that you claim is limited, but i claim is all-encompassing) then what point is there discussing him? you realy have nothing at all to say in this debate. nothing at all. such a being can never ever ever be known to us. but where i say bullshit, you say maybe.

    and why do you stop at ONE such entity? using your logic, there could me MILLIONS of such very-powerful beings. you have absolutely no idea what could lie beyond our rational faculty and five senses. of all the posters here, your position is by FAR the most meaningless. by far.

    so i have to return to what is man justified in believing? only that which our five senses and rational faculty can validate as knowledge.
     
    #1594     Sep 26, 2002
  5. smokey_mcPaat

    smokey_mcPaat Guest

    266 pages!!! thats insane!! has anyone actually read through ALL of this??
     
    #1595     Sep 26, 2002
  6.  
    #1596     Sep 26, 2002
  7. I already have. JESUS IS LORD OF LORDS AND KING OF KINGS
     
    #1597     Sep 26, 2002
  8. nicework, tripack. one day just maybe axe, gg, et al will get in touch with their spiritual side. untill then, they will never understand anything beyond.

    best,

    surf (currently flat across the board)
    :cool:
     
    #1598     Sep 26, 2002
  9.  
    #1599     Sep 26, 2002
  10. [​IMG]
     
    #1600     Sep 26, 2002
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.