Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-

100% Proof of God

Name: Bodhitharta 2007-04-30 22:15 ID:fEwlSLBb

Reliability is 100% proof of God and it's funny that when I have explained it most atheist simply have no response as if ignoring it will go away.

The laws of physics are reliable and there is no doubt that reliability is a proof of a binding, in-fact to rely is to bind. A description of binding is: Imposing or commanding adherence to a commitment, an obligation or a duty. In other words there can be no reliability by chance, there can be no reliability without a conscious imposition or command.

We live in a world in which we rely on foodstuffs to only take a certain time to grow, could you imagine what would happen if vegetation, grains and fruits took two years to become edible?

So we rely on water and foodstuffs. We also rely on the laws of physics and so forth to acquire knowledge. Knowledge can only be gathered in a reliable environment. Reproduction is reliable. We are genetically instructed as living organisms to reproduce.

Reliability is 100% proof of God. We enter this world liable and when we rely on God we become reliable.

Name: Anonymous 2007-04-30 22:18 ID:+yxYooGK

OBJECTION

SPECULATION

Name: Anonymous 2007-04-30 22:50 ID:QgJpjmXZ

Reproduction is reliable. We are genetically instructed as living organisms to reproduce.

tell me, do you have sex because you like it and want to do it, or because god tells you to?

Name: Anonymous 2007-04-30 22:56 ID:Heaven

"Stuff's reliable, therefore god exists"

With logical reasoning skills like that, I'm sure you're bound to be the next Cantor/Godel/etc.

Name: Anonymous 2007-04-30 23:01 ID:DZVuzKXI

what if god made stuff random? i mean theres plenty of evidence in the bible (water into wine for one) of random events occuring. Maybe order proves god doesn't exist.

Name: Anonymous 2007-04-30 23:09 ID:0A/zZnau

Most of what you call 100% proof is just baseless conjecture. If you can prove every assumption you made in that incoherent mess, then I'll believe you.

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-01 1:23 ID:ZIuftHg1

>>5
that was not random FUCKFACE
>>1
Are you Christian or Catholic?
if you are mormon... FUCK YOUUUUUUUU!
i believe that there is a god and a purpose. all of these atheists are just running because they dont want to have rules or think that there is anything better than them.

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-01 4:12 ID:PGWV1e+C

Troll?

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-01 8:24 ID:kLD+Xiy2

terrible horrible thread to wake up to

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-01 15:41 ID:dlyPG7ZX

Reliability is 100% proof of ""ODIN"" and it's funny that when I have explained it most atheist simply have no response as if ignoring it will go away.

The laws of physics are reliable and there is no doubt that reliability is a proof of a binding, in-fact to rely is to bind. A description of binding is: Imposing or commanding adherence to a commitment, an obligation or a duty. In other words there can be no reliability by chance, there can be no reliability without a conscious imposition or command.

We live in a world in which we rely on foodstuffs to only take a certain time to grow, could you imagine what would happen if vegetation, grains and fruits took two years to become edible?

So we rely on water and foodstuffs. We also rely on the laws of physics and so forth to acquire knowledge. Knowledge can only be gathered in a reliable environment. Reproduction is reliable. We are genetically instructed as living organisms to reproduce.

Reliability is 100% proof of ""ODIN"". We enter this world liable and when we rely on ""ODIN"" we become reliable.

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-01 16:36 ID:y9/WVYpr

>>10
You see, OP, you could learn something from this person. His arguments make perfect sense.

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-01 16:57 ID:KkD0kVmG

Only two things are reliable: death and taxes. All other things fail sometimes. Death and taxes come from governments. Therefore Governments made the universe.

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-01 17:11 ID:VWgsTfFz

>>1
this board is about science & math but u r writing about shit & fail !

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-01 17:21 ID:8zOVO4C6

>>1
What exactly do you mean by realiable, maybe people don't understand you because the term "reliable" is ambiguous and they don't know what you mean exactly.

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-01 18:45 ID:jymfS6Ae

What of the people born into wealth that never have to work a day in their life and rely entirely on those who serve them?

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-01 19:41 ID:fkG4gfRS

Reliable - Real Eye-able

Able to be really eyed.

In that case god is definitely not reliable.

Name: Bodhitharta 2007-05-02 0:20 ID:gEwRR3gz

OP here.

>>1
is copypasta from another forum.

You guys are way too easily trolled.

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-02 0:25 ID:GTauR+M+

>>15
they don't rely on them

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-02 16:48 ID:+Tb43gai

Reliable - Real Eye-able

Able to be really eyed.

In that case ""BAHAMUT"" is definitely not reliable.

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-04 1:20 ID:wXLP8LBo

>>17

lol owned

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-04 2:57 ID:xyAowFEG

ummm the world is anything but reliable. Tell the 12 month old who got sodomised to death in a bathroom at a shopping centre that the world is reliable....your a fool, please remove your brain with a screwdriver please.

Name: edward 2007-05-04 9:42 ID:WPd/1ztP

ok, i think ur all fools

from evry post i've read words are twisted, facts are wrong, and its a MATH and SCIENCE board, the original post is just worded so it sounds alittle scientific..... Now i believe in god, and i can tell u that there's no relevance between, God, and Reliable.....

and to hav final say, in my opinion, (being that i'll duel master in math and phylosophy),
and a strong believer in god,

THERE IS NO PROOF.......OR DISPROOF, that there is a higher beings called wutever u want. PERIOD


to bring alittle science in play, to be able to PROVE that god exsists u must PROVE the therory of there being 2 space times. (now scientists know that there are, but wen it comes down to it, a person cant prove the molecules their made out of exists)

these 2 different space times have 2 different names
-Objective Reality
and
-Subjective Reality

we live in the objective reality, its hard to explain, and hard to understand but basically because humans can never be fully grown, the subjective reality Secular Trend in human growth which shows that no human being is fully grown, and therefore no one's brain is fully grown and this causes our subjective reality to be a curved version of actual objective reality.

you see, what science is, is the study of objective reality...
what we call religion is the study of subjective reality...
neither is fully right, yet neither is fully wrong.....

there u go, an actually theory, dont like it, look it up, theres a mathematical proof too lol, but too lazy to go into it, peace and luv man. smoke mor herb

Name: edward 2007-05-04 9:45 ID:WPd/1ztP

javascript:quote(22,"post1177978860");


-Subjective Reality

we live in the objective reality, its hard to explain, and hard to understand but basically because humans can never be fully grown, the subjective reality Secular Trend in human growth which shows that no human being is fully grown, and therefore no one's brain is fully grown and this causes our subjective reality to be a curved version of actual objective reality.

you see, what science is, is the study of objective reality...
what we call religion is the study of subjective reality...
neither is fully right, yet neither is fully wrong.....

there u go, an actually theory, dont like it, look it up, theres a mathematical proof too lol, but too lazy to go into it, peace and luv man. smoke mor herb>>22
>>22
>>22
>>22
>>22

Name: edward 2007-05-04 9:49 ID:WPd/1ztP

by the way this is called the "Scientific Proof of God", by George Hammond

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-04 12:27 ID:mDBSHKD4

>>23
>>24
what

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-04 14:04 ID:Heaven

>>22
>>23
>>24
Thanks, that's the funniest thing I've ever read in my life. The grammar really adds to it, too.

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-04 15:16 ID:coSLl88t

>>1
The laws of physics are consistent.  They are not reliable by your definition.

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-04 16:16 ID:rEzOSPxB

by the way this is called the "Scientific Proof of GILGAMESH", by George Hammond

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-05 13:46 ID:H6LfWPhx

still doesnt prove that god exists, if anything happens it happens out of coincidence.

Name: Anonymous 2007-05-08 7:08 ID:Heaven

Even if we were created, which is pure speculation to begin with, who says our creator(s) would necessarily be a deity, let alone the Judeo-Christian one? Maybe reality as we know it is a highly advanced simulation programmed by a team of "4-D Beings" that look like us -- or rather, that we look like. (Think Star Ocean: Till the End of Time.)

In grade 6, I learned that ancient Greeks believed Titans created the cosmos.

Name: Anonymous 2009-03-18 2:26

I wants lots and lots of some delectable pot!

Marijuana MUST be legalized.

Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List