Prove there's a god.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#679297 Dec 19, 2013
Hukt on Fonix wrote:
Proof doesn't exist until it exist.
Ya it does, it simply hasn't been discovered yet.

By you, anyway.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#679298 Dec 19, 2013
Hukt on Fonix wrote:
Evidence is suggestive.
Proof is conclusive.
A god would be proof of a god.
You can't conclude there's a god.
You have no proof.
Proof doesn't exist.
"A god would be proof of a god."

o.O

Very astute.

Ask Him, truthfully and honestly.

You'll see.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#679299 Dec 19, 2013
LuciFerr wrote:
Got no proof huh? Just say it, admit you can't prove a god exists.
I've got no proof and I can't prove God exists.

So what?

I've also got no proof of your hands and I can't prove they exist.

I also have no proof of DNA and -->I<-- can't prove DNA is real.

Again I ask, so what?

“Spelin 'n' tpyin...”

Since: Feb 08

...are my strong suits!

#679300 Dec 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Ya it does, it simply hasn't been discovered yet.
By you, anyway.
There's no proof of a god.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#679301 Dec 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>I've got no proof and I can't prove God exists.

So what?

I've also got no proof of your hands and I can't prove they exist.

I also have no proof of DNA and -->I<-- can't prove DNA is real.

Again I ask, so what?
So what?

Is that king dude right? You on crack?

How do things, verifiable things, things that exist, verifiably, such as hands and DNA compare to a fictional character in a badly written book who fcked his own mom?

HOW?????

“Spelin 'n' tpyin...”

Since: Feb 08

...are my strong suits!

#679302 Dec 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
"A god would be proof of a god."
o.O
Very astute.
Ask Him, truthfully and honestly.
You'll see.
What "Him"?

You have no proof of a "Him" to ask.

If you did, you'd present it.

Truthfully and honestly, the proof doesn't exist.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#679303 Dec 19, 2013
Is this you RR?

http://youtu.be/RNPxIibhcKY

“Spelin 'n' tpyin...”

Since: Feb 08

...are my strong suits!

#679304 Dec 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I've got no proof and I can't prove God exists.
That's all you need to say and you need to say no more.

Why pile on all the extraneous crap?

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#679305 Dec 19, 2013
Hukt on Fonix wrote:
<quoted text>
Proof doesn't exist until it exist.
Correct.

If certain people would get an education they would not make such stupid statements.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#679306 Dec 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Negative.
I'm trying to use a more simple concept to understand. Simpler that a God concept, nacho cheese.
You can't force someone to like nacho cheese. One either likes it or they don't. And you can't convince someone who's never heard of nacho cheese that it's tasty or disgusting.
They are nacho cheese ignorant and will call you delusional.
What in the world are you talking about? This isn't relevant at all. I never said anything about 'forcing" someone to like nachos, and I never said I could convince anyone whether or not they would like it. I said that your comparison between the "difficulty" of proving that you like nacho cheese and the actual difficulty of proving a god is nonsensical. Again, if someone says they like something that we know to exist, that claim can be taken at face value. That's all the "evidence" we need, because it is a mundane claim about a mundane thing, and it deals with things that are known to exist - food and preferences. Not so for god.

Also, no one would call me "delusional" for telling them they would like nachos. Are you being serious? They might not agree with me, but again, the existence of nacho cheese and the existence of likes or dislikes is not in question. It's not the same as, say, me telling someone that they would love the tender embrace of apollo, regardless of how much you wish it to be so.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#679307 Dec 19, 2013
LuciFerr wrote:
<quoted text>
So what?
Is that king dude right? You on crack?
How do things, verifiable things, things that exist, verifiably, such as hands and DNA compare to a fictional character in a badly written book who fcked his own mom?
HOW?????
What fictional character in a book?

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#679308 Dec 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
A baseless assertion.
This is a statement you cannot know or verify.
The existence of entire cultures that have never heard of your god is verification enough. You can be a pedant and claim that everyone who has heard of christianity has spoken to god, as absurd as that claim would be, but since I know you are not above absurdity we will forget that.

We know, for a fact, that your god does not exist as far as many peoples are concerned, currently and throughout history. One would assume that if god could speak to people, his glorious voice wouldn't be limited by cultural trends or geographical boundaries, so the fact that not one of these cultures spontaneously converts until tempted to do so by an outside force is proof enough that he doesn't speak to these people (or really anyone, but whatever).

Now, you will say that god spoke to them but they didn't know it, or some other such nonsense.

“I never claimed to be Perfect”

Since: Nov 10

just better than yesterday

#679309 Dec 19, 2013
Hukt on Fonix wrote:
<quoted text>
Tucker Case is also a character in Christopher Moore's 'The Stupidest Angel'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Stupidest_An...
I enjoyed all of Moore's books.
Have my favorites on audio... and of those, the ones narrated by Fisher Stevens are better listened to than read, IMO.
Oh man..... I've got such a backlog of books to read.....I still haven't read Catcher's book that he recommended almost a year ago.

I'm like a modern day Mr. Beemis from the Twilight Zone I suppose.......

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#679310 Dec 19, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
What do you suppose was "arbitrarily" placed in the Bible?
Do you suppose that the compilers of the bible had some sort of objective way to tell which books were truly inspired and which weren't?

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#679311 Dec 19, 2013
LuciFerr wrote:
Is this you RR?
http://youtu.be/RNPxIibhcKY
I wish I had a riding lawn mower, shiiiiiiit....

Alls I got is a self-propelled walk behind mower.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#679312 Dec 19, 2013
Hukt on Fonix wrote:
<quoted text>
There's no proof of a god.
Not for you, no.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#679314 Dec 19, 2013
Al Garcia wrote:
<quoted text>
No proof to you personally that is.......
you cannot speak for everyone else I'm afraid...
Ultimately, I believe that belief in God is founded on a choice to acknowledge the existence of God without any incontrovertible evidence. That simply is called faith. A simple word with very deep meanings and understandings. I don't believe that it's anyone else’s responsibility to prove to another person that God exists. It's really our own responsibility to turn to God and ask Him to prove His existence to us individually. That simply stated is between you and him.
Until you do that no proof is possible to you.
Just my opinion.
I think the same thing, except about thor. So really, it's your responsibility to renounce your heretical ways and ask thor to forgive you for your transgressions. There really is proof if you look for him, trust me. You just gotta believe before you have any reason to believe.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#679315 Dec 19, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>What in the world are you talking about? This isn't relevant at all. I never said anything about 'forcing" someone to like nachos, and I never said I could convince anyone whether or not they would like it. I said that your comparison between the "difficulty" of proving that you like nacho cheese and the actual difficulty of proving a god is nonsensical. Again, if someone says they like something that we know to exist, that claim can be taken at face value. That's all the "evidence" we need, because it is a mundane claim about a mundane thing, and it deals with things that are known to exist - food and preferences. Not so for god.
Also, no one would call me "delusional" for telling them they would like nachos. Are you being serious? They might not agree with me, but again, the existence of nacho cheese and the existence of likes or dislikes is not in question. It's not the same as, say, me telling someone that they would love the tender embrace of apollo, regardless of how much you wish it to be so.
If I tell you I love nacho cheese, you'll likely believe me.

Why?

Because you've experienced the sense of taste and understand the idea of loving and hating different foods.

You have no "sense" of God, you've never experienced Him. So no matter what I say, you won't believe me.

It's like trying to explain to a blind man what the color blue looks like.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#679316 Dec 19, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>The existence of entire cultures that have never heard of your god is verification enough. You can be a pedant and claim that everyone who has heard of christianity has spoken to god, as absurd as that claim would be, but since I know you are not above absurdity we will forget that.
We know, for a fact, that your god does not exist as far as many peoples are concerned, currently and throughout history. One would assume that if god could speak to people, his glorious voice wouldn't be limited by cultural trends or geographical boundaries, so the fact that not one of these cultures spontaneously converts until tempted to do so by an outside force is proof enough that he doesn't speak to these people (or really anyone, but whatever).
Now, you will say that god spoke to them but they didn't know it, or some other such nonsense.
Well now you're just assuming that other gods are not God represented differently.

Who are you to assert that?

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#679317 Dec 19, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Do you suppose that the compilers of the bible had some sort of objective way to tell which books were truly inspired and which weren't?
Answering a question with a question isn't an answer.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 4 min Jim-ca 45,693
Which is the Oldest Indian Language? Sanskrit V... (Jul '08) 57 min el rey de los cam... 8,526
Why are Europeans a race of savages, thieves, a... (Jun '15) 1 hr el rey de los cam... 385
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 1 hr Robert F 691,853
Mista Shrink Doo Doo Bwain! 8 hr Doctor REALITY 2
mamba......... 8 hr Doctor REALITY 3
Is it fine watching porn with family members?? (Dec '09) 14 hr Doctor REALITY 8
More from around the web