Prove that God doesn't exist.

[Cheshire Cat]

"That must prove god exists.
Good job, you have me convinced."
--Cheshire, you should go check your MySpace page, not try to contend with educated people debating worthy topics.

My mommy won't let me have a myspace page

 

[ArmChair General]

"NO thats the utter truth. There is no possible way that you could KNOW that God exists. If there is a way, prove it to me."

--I feel I already have. The only way we can know anything for certain is by not being able to disprove it (e.g. 'Null hypothesis' for all you scientists out there).

What. You have to prove something first.

Can you disprove that Zues doesnt exist? Can you disprove that we aren't running in a simulation on some super alien computer?

No of course not. If you beileve there is a God, present evidence and it will be disproved.

 

[ArmChair General]

Have you realized that you have to use my points to even try to disprove God's existence? Can you even argue against God's existence from an original point? In all probability God exists--from an outside perspective.

Have you realized, that its not my job to disprove Gods existence. Its your job to prove his existence.

 

[Kelly]

"But by far the majority of the NT, and all of the OT, is a statement of intolerance and ignorance."
--You're absolutely right. And I can't stand that about the Bible. But, I (and you should to) realize that those statements are the result of sociological (really anthropological) and historical context. Christians believe that the Word of God came to men (who are imperfect--Original Sin) who put their own spin on it to further their own agendas. I know you know this about history and how people manipulate things. "Who wins the war wins the history."

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Have you realized that you have to use my points to even try to disprove God's existence? Can you even argue against God's existence from an original point? In all probability God exists--from an outside perspective.

Your original point was to "Prove god doesn't exist".

To prove something means the use of science, and acceptable methods of testing. Tests that can repeated by others and get the exact same results.

Your original premise is a false one. It is up to you to prove the actual existence of something, not the other way around. Your question was false to begin with, as is your god.

 

[Kelly]

"No of course not. If you beileve there is a God, present evidence and it will be disproved."
--So if I had evidence, you would disprove it? There's obviously nothing I can say, demonstrate, or prove to you if your mind's already fixed like it is on a certain belief.

 

[Kelly]

"Have you realized, that its not my job to disprove Gods existence. Its your job to prove his existence."
--Did you read the title of this thread that you chose to participate in?

 

[Kelly]

"To prove something means the use of science, and acceptable methods of testing. Tests that can repeated by others and get the exact same results."
--You should go and learn Scientific Method. When a theory cannot be disproved for a certain amount of time, it becomes scientific law. Technically, God's existence is scientific law.

 

[ArmChair General]

"But by far the majority of the NT, and all of the OT, is a statement of intolerance and ignorance."
--You're absolutely right. And I can't stand that about the Bible. But, I (and you should to) realize that those statements are the result of sociological (really anthropological) and historical context. Christians believe that the Word of God came to men (who are imperfect--Original Sin) who put their own spin on it to further their own agendas. I know you know this about history and how people manipulate things. "Who wins the war wins the history."

Wow! your the first beilever who has ever actually admitted that.

The problem though, is that if these are supposedly inerrant texts, written with divine inspiration. They can't possibly be wrong.

Furthermore, your argument has the sound of Moral Relativism to it. It was ok then, because that was how things were back then....Just like slavery was without a doubt OK to do according to the OT, and in the NT, at the very least it was never objected too, and at the most was supported. Depending on how you interpret certain passages.

 

[Kelly]

Cheshire, are you afraid to accept God's existence because you're a lesbian and you think you'd go to hell for it if God does exist? If that's the case, please know that I'm not a religious intolerant freak. I don't believe that mess. I'm not the enemy like you probably thing I am. Or, is your signature just another stab at other people that are different from you?

 

[Cheshire Cat]

"To prove something means the use of science, and acceptable methods of testing. Tests that can repeated by others and get the exact same results."
--You should go and learn Scientific Method. When a theory cannot be disproved for a certain amount of time, it becomes scientific law. Technically, God's existence is scientific law.

Do you still think the earth is flat to?

 

[ArmChair General]

"No of course not. If you beileve there is a God, present evidence and it will be disproved."
--So if I had evidence, you would disprove it? There's obviously nothing I can say, demonstrate, or prove to you if your mind's already fixed like it is on a certain belief.

So your admitting you have no evidence?

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Cheshire, are you afraid to accept God's existence because you're a lesbian and you think you'd go to hell for it if God does exist? If that's the case, please know that I'm not a religious intolerant freak. I don't believe that mess. I'm not the enemy like you probably thing I am. Or, is your signature just another stab at other people that are different from you?

I'm not afraid to accept anything that can be proven. Fear has nothing to do with it.

 

[ArmChair General]

"Have you realized, that its not my job to disprove Gods existence. Its your job to prove his existence."
--Did you read the title of this thread that you chose to participate in?

Yes, and its a fallacy. Im just pointing this out to you.

 

[Kelly]

"Wow! your the first beilever who has ever actually admitted that."
--Thanks, there ARE a lot more of us out there (Basilian Catholics, etc.).

"The problem though, is that if these are supposedly inerrant texts, written with divine inspiration. They can't possibly be wrong."
--Not true my friend. Man is imperfect and will always make a mistake or two (not trying to be cynical here). Plus, any Bible available to us today has been through several translations and ,therefore, subject to all sorts of errors. I, and many others read the Bible for the 'big picture.' Part of that big picture is that man is not perfect and screws up things within that picture (Bible). I believe that that is a big message to people who read the Bible.


"Furthermore, your argument has the sound of Moral Relativism to it. It was ok then, because that was how things were back then....Just like slavery was without a doubt OK to do according to the OT, and in the NT, at the very least it was never objected too, and at the most was supported. Depending on how you interpret certain passages."
--Again historical context and human filtering. The proof of this (historical context and human filtering) is in the fact that the Bible seems to contradict itself. 'Do not kill," but the Hebrews killed all sorts of folks. It's crazy to take the Bible literally, word for word. "Big picture!"