Regarding the Existence or Absence of God

[axeman]

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

Originally posted by I Missed Boat


Actually, you didn't. How would we know if God is omnicient, as you keep saying? If we met God, God might demonstrate that it could perform miracles, but how would God prove to US that it knew and could do essentially everything?

Originally posted by TriPack



So, any more arguments Tripack?
You conceded on the first one regarding proof
of omniscience requiring omniscience.
I commend you on that one.



axeman
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[axeman]

Originally posted by rs7

For what it's worth, I don't think if someone could turn water to wine that that would, with all certainty, prove them omnipresent or omnipotent or omniscient. Or to be God. Or is that the same thing?

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

peace

axeman

 

[axeman]

None of us exist? Would you like to attempt to argue
that you dont exist? From what position are you
arguing? Non-existence?

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

Originally posted by I Missed Boat

For all you know, none of us exist. For all we know, there are things that require more senses to perceive. The list goes on! These are some of the things that I've mentioned (multiple times) previously!!

 

[daniel_m]

Originally posted by I Missed Boat
which has nothing to do with with how limtied we are in understanding absolute reality. We rely on 5 senses and a limited (and flawed) system of logic. We can't understand or perceive what lies outside of these things! For all you know, none of us exist. For all we know, there are things that require more senses to perceive. The list goes on! These are some of the things that I've mentioned (multiple times) previously!!

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.

 

[smokey_mcPaat]

266 pages!!! thats insane!! has anyone actually read through ALL of this??

 

[goldenarm]

Originally posted by daniel_m


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!

Definition of God: God is the indescribable, uncreated, self existent, eternal all knowing source of all reality and being.

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?

Because the Bible states that He exists. If you choose to accept the Bible as the Word of God, then by default He will be discussed. If you doubt the validity of the Bible (like the atheists do) then you will see no point in discussing Him. Pretty straightforward to me.

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.

The Bible states that there is ONE God, not millions. Again, straightforward stuff. Why do you need to make things so convoluted and mixed up? You either believe in the eyewitness accounts depicted in the Bible (which is impossible to verify thousands of years in the future) or you choose not to. You whine that if God is indeed omnipotent and omniscient that He should deign to PROVE to us peons (that he CREATED, mind you) that He is indeed all-powerful! How presumptuous can you be to assume that He even CARES what you choose to believe or not? You'll either burn in everlasting hellfire or not. No sweat off His back!

Just give it a rest.

 

[thunderbolt]

Originally posted by daniel_m


ok, prove it. that's all it comes down to buddy. but you cannot and never will. and even worse, all the evidence we have says that he is a complete fabrication! so suck on that!

I already have. JESUS IS LORD OF LORDS AND KING OF KINGS

 

[marketsurfer]

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)

 

[thunderbolt]

Originally posted by axeman
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

Originally posted by TriPack



So, any more arguments Tripack?
You conceded on the first one regarding proof
of omniscience requiring omniscience.
I commend you on that one.



axeman
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

He raised a man dead for 4 days from the dead as well as himself after three--that'd be God.

 

[Gordon Gekko]