Topic: Do you believe in god? - page 118. (Read 316068 times)

No they don't.

Your links only show your assumptions which are not proof.

Please show proof.

Science law proves that God exists. Nature and the universe show that God exists. My links, above, simply put it together for anyone who is interested.

You continually claim that your god exists....

BADecker principle rule number 1:
"If a point of discussion does not meet criteria of one's own belief, then ignore the context and claim it is wrong".

Therefore, your proof is wrong, so please give me proof.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riCTEhezcYw  Burden of proof lies with those who claim god exists can be found here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uC7Ttc9g1u8   Answer to the first cause argument can be found here.

What claim are you talking about?

Oh, by the way, for anyone with a little reading comprehension, and knowledge of science fact, the proof that God exists can be found here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.

Not pushing anything. You made the claim and need to standby it, or retract your statement.

I am having lots of fun. You have lost out BADecker, your false logic has failed you and you are now avoiding your responsibilities.

I bet this is hurting you!

There you go, trying to stick a burden on me. Since the proof is above, in my links, you are simply pushing the burden onto yourself. It is becoming fun watching you squirm.

Your losing it....

You have made a claim and now you need to prove it.

You claim your god is real.... well prove it.

The burden of prove is with you.

If you can show proof then I will disprove it.

You have no credibility and that is hurting you.

There never was a burden of proof on me. However, the proof is shown in the links above. Now, rebut with rebuttal, and explain how the rebuttal is a rebuttal, point by point. If you don't, it will be known that the things you say are hogwash.

Your credibility is getting smaller all the time. Do you even have any left. Keep it up. We like it.

And you fail to understand that the burden of proof is on you to show the proof of your god's existence.

You claim it to be true, so prove it.

The rest of your writings are just "hogwash".

That's good that my words aren't proof. Of course, my words that express the proof don't stop it from being proof.

Come on! Be strong. You can rebut the proof that God exists. Don't simply say that it has been rebutted. Don't simply show some websites that you say have rebutted the proof. Get into the thing yourself. Show how the proof has been rebutted step by step. Are you so lazy? Is it really too much work? You realize, don't you, that all your talk is a lot of work over the days and weeks. If you can't get into it and state the way the points of proof are rebutted point by point, step by step, how can you or anyone really even know that you have found a rebuttal?

Until you can clearly show the rebuttal by getting right into the explanation of it, all your talk about a rebuttal is hogwash. All you are doing is strengthening the fact that God exists in the minds of all who watch the things you do and say. Your atheism religion was stupid to begin with. But it is an utter lie since it has been rebutted by the proof that God exists.

However, even if God didn't exist, atheism is really stupid, Why? Because nobody has near enough knowledge of the universe to state with any certainty that God does not exist.

Atheism is a religious cult. Even the dictionary definition of "religion" shows that atheism is a religion, indirectly.

Your words are not proof.

Find real proof or give up.

Since you are not into accepting proof that you don't want to accept, there is no reason to keep on giving it to you.

A little about you has come to light. You see yourself as a cult leader! You do not have the ability to listen to read and do not see your own failures.

BADecker principle rule number 1:
"If a point of discussion does not meet criteria of one's own belief, then ignore the context and claim it is wrong".

Therefore, your proof is wrong, so please give me proof.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riCTEhezcYw  Burden of proof lies with those who claim god exists can be found here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uC7Ttc9g1u8   Answer to the first cause argument can be found here.

A little more knowledge about you comes to light. You flunked basic reading comprehension.

God exists. These websites show the proof:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.

However, even if God didn't exist, you don't have any kind of a shred of knowledge or fact that He doesn't exist. So, when you say he doesn't exist, you are simply stating your beliefs or wishes, and, you are showing how deceptive you are, right out in the open.

God does not force Him to love and believe in Him. He gave us freedom of choice. Only in the world there are physical laws. Everyone understands that if you fall from a high altitude, you will break up and die. This is Newton's law of gravitation. There are spiritual laws. The soul can also be broken and die, only it is immortal and therefore its death turns into a disease for a person.

Finally you agree that there is no proof for the existence of your god. Now we have the circular arguement.

Thanks for upholding the truth of it all - your delusional stance.

That's right. I agree that there is no proof against the existence of God. Thanks again for showing that you are deceptive, by twisting my words. This dishonesty of yours shows that you agree that you do not have any rebuttal to the scientific proof and the evidence of nature that show that God exists.

But it is not any more imaginary than the reality that exists around us.   

The apparent rebuttal you used is only theory. You can't rebut science law with science theory. Just because your rebuttal is partially based on science law, doesn't make it science law.

Since everything operates by cause and effect, and since entropy says that there must have been a beginning, and since there is great complexity in everything, there must have been something or someone to start all this cause and effect complexity. We see none of it simply starting in nature anywhere. We see no method at all for it to start. Yet the fact that it exists shows that it must have started. The method by which it all started is God, because it is way more intelligent and powerful that we are to make all this complexity happen through cause and effect.

So, it is God by definition, not by what some religious books say.

God can not be seen, one must feel it. It is necessary to give unconditional love to all living things and you will receive true love.