Prove to me that God exists (page 9)

Qcmbr

..sometimes I wonder whether their is room in an equal society for anyone religious! I find it strange that condescension, rudeness and sarcasm colour many of the comments. It makes it kinda hard to say anything if people's lame arse answer to anything proposed requires reference to a part of someones religion that they don't believe in.

Ah well.

I believe in God - it is probably impossible to prove that sort of thing here on a message board any more than its possible to prove love, hope or consciousness - these things only come by the living and experiencing. One day maybe those who are so quick to deride God and His adherants will have a one on one personal experience with Deity - at least you'll know what the other side of the arguement feels like - the one where you've had something incredibly precious and when you share it other people just take the mick.

LittleToe

For once I've got to agree with Q.
Some days you really are a condescending tw*t, arent you, Terry

Oreo cookies, green smoke and boolean logic;
Is that the best you can come up with?

If you are attempting to open minds then your approach is facile.
Blowing someone off, when they are genuinely trying to acheive some kind of common understanding, is about as much use as a condom machine in the Vatican.

zen nudist

simple--- you exist, you are real, you are conscious, you are part of the single reality, which as we have just estabilished, exists, is real and is conscious, thus you are God.... as there is no other meaning of the term God but reality dreaming [see Brahma]

Pole

Prove to me that God exists

WHOAA!!!

Makena1

Trevor well said!

Here is my proof:

http://www.salma.com/imagepages/image20.html

trevor

Makena 1

Thanks for that, you have great taste in women. All my doubts have been swept aside and I believe I have found a new path to enlightenment.

If a walk in the park doesn’t do it for CinemaBlend then your offering may persuade him.

Deputy Dog

Abaddon

My beliefs in the area of the development of life are based upon what evidence supports, not an insistance that evidence either supports an already existing 'truth', or an insistance that any disagreement with an already existing 'truth' is by definition the result of wrong interpretation of evidence, or any similar illogicities.

Yea right! By existing truth you must mean things like atheism, agnosticism. Darwinism? If you really think you don't rely on any presuppositions in your reasoning, you are engaging in something else Dr. Bahnsen is an expert in, self deception.

tetrapod.sapien

Yea right! By existing truth you must mean things like atheism, agnosticism. Darwinism?

uh..., depdog, you should re-read what you were replying to. abaddon was saying that he doesn't hold those things to be existing truths in their own right, but arrived at conclusions based on evidence. not insistance that evidence fall into line with existing truth. you really need to take a step back and take a look at what you are going off about.

If you really think you don't rely on any presuppositions in your reasoning,

"presuppositions"?? atheism is the default position good sir. a lack of belief. like when you and i were born. no gods, no beliefs, just life. the default position. there are no presuppositions there.

something else Dr. Bahnsen is an expert in, self deception.

oh no! dr. bahnsen! appeal to authority, again! i hope he has helped you with his specialty. oh, also, i have got one for you too: "if you really think you can argue for god in your reasoning, you are engaging in something else Dr. Richard Dawkins is an expert in, atheism."

the point? who cares who your role models are?! to continue to call upon them, is a fallacy called Appeal to Authority.

OldSoul

If God exists, there is really only one method by which God could prove that existence to anyone. In much the same way that there is only one way in which I can prove my own existence to anyone. By impacting them in some way, by making his/her existence known.

As far as my existence can be proven, it can only be proven through the impacts of my existence on my surroundings.

Do I exist? Whether I do or not I will continue to behave as though I do, so the question being asked or answered by me is moot. However, ask yourselves how much proof you have of my existence and you may be surprised to learn that you don't have very much scientific proof I exist. Even if you met me your proof would be experiential, not scientific.

I hope this gives some food for consideration.

Respectfully,
OldSoul

Deputy Dog

the point? who cares who your role models are?! to continue to call upon them, is a fallacy called Appeal to Authority.

I'm not appealing to any "Authority". I said, he is deceiving himself, I didn't say Bahnsen said it.

atheism is the default position good sir. a lack of belief.

It most certainly is not the default position, I suppose someone could try to say that naturalism is. But, look at the word "atheism", it presupposes theism. There is no "default position".

abaddon was saying that he doesn't hold those things to be existing truths in their own right, but arrived at conclusions based on evidence.

It has nothing to do with following the evidence, it has everything to do with interpreting the evidence and what wieght to give to certain evidence. That is why people draw different conclusions based on the same evidence. Everyone presupposes when they reason. Your talking to a cop, I know about evidence Oops, is that appealing to "Authority"?

Prove to me that God exists

Share this