Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Could God exist?
3 views
Skip to first unread message
Olrik
Sep 29, 2011, 11:31:56 PM9/29/11
to
On 2011-09-28 16:49, dh@. wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 15:53:02 -0500, Mike Lovell<mike....@null.local> wrote:
>
>> On 2011-09-26, dh@.<dh@> wrote:
>>> Here's a list of things to keep in mind when trying to think about the
>>> possibility of God's existence in a realistic way:
>>> [...]
>>
>> Great, now prove he does.
>
> Again:
>
> 4. If God exists and wants things to be as they are, he
> could not provide proof of his existence because doing
> so would change things too much.
Nice cop-out. It's you "get out of jail card"!
> . . .
>> here's a few to bear in mind
>
> They all seem childlike and not at all realistic, from my pov. So far it
> appears that you're not capable of considering the possibility of God's
> existence in a realistic way.
Define "realistic".
> On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 15:53:02 -0500, Mike Lovell<mike....@null.local> wrote:
>
>> On 2011-09-26, dh@.<dh@> wrote:
>>> Here's a list of things to keep in mind when trying to think about the
>>> possibility of God's existence in a realistic way:
>>> [...]
>>
>> Great, now prove he does.
>
> Again:
>
> 4. If God exists and wants things to be as they are, he
> could not provide proof of his existence because doing
> so would change things too much.
Nice cop-out. It's you "get out of jail card"!
> . . .
>> here's a few to bear in mind
>
> They all seem childlike and not at all realistic, from my pov. So far it
> appears that you're not capable of considering the possibility of God's
> existence in a realistic way.
Define "realistic".
Christopher A. Lee
Sep 29, 2011, 11:44:52 PM9/29/11
to
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 23:31:56 -0400, Olrik <olri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On 2011-09-28 16:49, dh@. wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 15:53:02 -0500, Mike Lovell<mike....@null.local> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2011-09-26, dh@.<dh@> wrote:
>>>> Here's a list of things to keep in mind when trying to think about the
>>>> possibility of God's existence in a realistic way:
>>>> [...]
>>>
>>> Great, now prove he does.
>>
>> Again:
>>
>> 4. If God exists and wants things to be as they are, he
>> could not provide proof of his existence because doing
>> so would change things too much.
>
>Nice cop-out. It's you "get out of jail card"!
And why should we consider what remains merely somebody else's wacky
>On 2011-09-28 16:49, dh@. wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 15:53:02 -0500, Mike Lovell<mike....@null.local> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2011-09-26, dh@.<dh@> wrote:
>>>> Here's a list of things to keep in mind when trying to think about the
>>>> possibility of God's existence in a realistic way:
>>>> [...]
>>>
>>> Great, now prove he does.
>>
>> Again:
>>
>> 4. If God exists and wants things to be as they are, he
>> could not provide proof of his existence because doing
>> so would change things too much.
>
>Nice cop-out. It's you "get out of jail card"!
belief until they demonstrate otherwise, when there is no reason to?
0 new messages