Advertisement
by Australian rePublic » Sat May 25, 2019 5:34 am
Vallermoore wrote:To show Himself (or Herself) in the sky to everyone at once at the same time.
by Internationalist Bastard » Sat May 25, 2019 5:38 am
by Australian rePublic » Sat May 25, 2019 5:39 am
New Totzka wrote:IMO it would be nearly impossible for a god to prove it's existence. Even if a being could perform miracles that could defy scientific explanation, it wouldn't prove it was a god that we should worship.
by Australian rePublic » Sat May 25, 2019 5:40 am
Dogmeat wrote:God knows.
by Duhon » Sat May 25, 2019 5:42 am
by Hyperion Remnant Fleet » Sat May 25, 2019 5:48 am
The Cosmic Revelation: The heretics and traitors of the Holy Space Marines have defected and proclaimed the establishment of the Svalbard Chapter in the Valley of the Damned! Rumors are abuzz that Vice Admiral Gideon is the leader of this conspiracy.
by Australian rePublic » Sat May 25, 2019 5:48 am
Greater vakolicci haven wrote:Give me my sight back.
by Australian rePublic » Sat May 25, 2019 5:59 am
Ard al Islam wrote:And to all of you, I wonder why you immediately assumed that I was talking about Muhammad. I was, but he was not the only Messenger. There were others:
Noah
Eber
Salah
Abraham
Lot
Ishmael
Joseph
Jethro
Moses
Elijah
Jonah
Jesus
by Australian rePublic » Sat May 25, 2019 6:07 am
Hammer Britannia wrote:UIJ wrote:OP asked a question, I answered it. What is there to debate?
On whether or not "Reason X" is a good reason to believe in Yahweh
Personally, I think all of the reasons here besides "taking it on faith" is utter bullshit (and even then, I believe that argument is a bit iffy). After all, all evidence for a higher creator does not point to any particular god being right.
Every message needs a message maker, sure let's say that's correct. How does that prove the god of the Jews/Christians? It doesn't, someone could make an equally valid argument for my Gods, Hinduism, Buddhism, Heathenism, Animism, etc.
by Estanglia » Sat May 25, 2019 6:08 am
Torrocca wrote:"Your honor, it was not mein fault! I didn't order the systematic genocide of millions of people, it was the twenty kilograms of pure-cut Bavarian cocaine that did it!"
by Australian rePublic » Sat May 25, 2019 6:08 am
UIJ wrote:Hammer Britannia wrote:On whether or not "Reason X" is a good reason to believe in Yahweh
Personally, I think all of the reasons here besides "taking it on faith" is utter bullshit (and even then, I believe that argument is a bit iffy). After all, all evidence for a higher creator does not point to any particular god being right.
Every message needs a message maker, sure let's say that's correct. How does that prove the god of the Jews/Christians? It doesn't, someone could make an equally valid argument for my Gods, Hinduism, Buddhism, Heathenism, Animism, etc.
Again, OP asked a question, I answered it. No one is entitled to a serious debate (let alone a debate in general), as such I have no reason to waste time butting heads with people who are already firm in their beliefs. What is he going to do, cite the bible and faith, while i spew out countless stupid articles? What a waste of time.
by Australian rePublic » Sat May 25, 2019 6:09 am
Hammer Britannia wrote:UIJ wrote:Again, OP asked a question, I answered it. No one is entitled to a serious debate (let alone a debate in general), as such I have no reason to waste time butting heads with people who are already firm in their beliefs. What is he going to do, cite the bible and faith, while i spew out countless stupid articles? What a waste of time.
This is fair enough. Most Christians/Jews/Muslims point to their holy book as evidence for their Gods and you can't really argue against someone who's using a "Totally True" book. *Shrug*
by Australian rePublic » Sat May 25, 2019 6:10 am
Inkopolitia wrote:I'd have him in front of me in a room full of witnesses. Then, to prove his existence, i'd ask him to make Nintendo release Splatoon 3 (It isn't an actual game yet) using whatever time traveling magic he has
by The New California Republic » Sat May 25, 2019 6:13 am
Ifreann wrote:I could be convinced that an entity possessed "supernatural" powers by seeing it do verifiably impossible things. I don't think that anything could convince me that that entity is the specific supreme deity of some religion, nor that it created the universe, because I can't think of any evidence that could possibly support such a claim.
by Australian rePublic » Sat May 25, 2019 6:14 am
by Australian rePublic » Sat May 25, 2019 6:16 am
Neanderthaland wrote:Presumably an omnipotent God would know exactly what it would have to do to prove itself indisputably to absolutely everyone.
by Ifreann » Sat May 25, 2019 6:19 am
Omakhandia wrote:Explain why whales have pelvises.
Australian rePublic wrote:Inkopolitia wrote:I'd have him in front of me in a room full of witnesses. Then, to prove his existence, i'd ask him to make Nintendo release Splatoon 3 (It isn't an actual game yet) using whatever time traveling magic he has
So you'll only believe in God if He creates you freebies?
by The New California Republic » Sat May 25, 2019 6:21 am
by Luna Amore » Sat May 25, 2019 6:21 am
by Ifreann » Sat May 25, 2019 6:30 am
by Brightlake » Sat May 25, 2019 6:31 am
by Kernen » Sat May 25, 2019 7:02 am
by Hammer Britannia » Sat May 25, 2019 7:07 am
Australian rePublic wrote:UIJ wrote:Again, OP asked a question, I answered it. No one is entitled to a serious debate (let alone a debate in general), as such I have no reason to waste time butting heads with people who are already firm in their beliefs. What is he going to do, cite the bible and faith, while i spew out countless stupid articles? What a waste of time.
Actually, using the Bible in and of itself is an utterly stupid thing to do. Thanks for assuming how I'm going to debate
Australian rePublic wrote:Hammer Britannia wrote:This is fair enough. Most Christians/Jews/Muslims point to their holy book as evidence for their Gods and you can't really argue against someone who's using a "Totally True" book. *Shrug*
Which once again is stupid, and assuming that I would do so is a false assumption
Advertisement
Advertisement