How do you know God isn't dead?

[Statler Waldorf]

The word "even" qualified my statement. And, if there was any doubt if the shoe fit, there is none now.

I realize you’re not very proficient with this English thing, but that’s not how the word “even” is used at all. It means level or equal to, a person with an above average IQ does not have an IQ equal to that of an average person.

Nice try, but there's a huge hole in your deductions:

This ought to be good.

Actually video footage (several actually) of Thor is available to anyone and everyone, and another is being made as we speak. He can be seen wielding his powers and inheriting the divine throne.

Deduction trumps induction (videos).

Since Yahweh cannot co-exist with another god, one can only conclude that Thor, who has actually been caught on tape demonstrating his power and existence, has stomped Yahweh into the divine mud, destroying him or rendering him powerless.

Something that does not exist cannot stomp Yahweh into mud, you’re awfully good at nonsensical hypotheticals aren’t you?

How is that consistent with the powers Yahweh is believed to have? Simple, he never had those powers. If "his work" has proven anything, it's that god tends to think he's much more powerful and effective than he actually is. His work sucks! How powerful could he really be.

Deduction (God has certain powers) trumps inductions (from what you see you do not think God has those powers).

At the end of the day, god is just another big shit talker. He says this and that, but when it comes time to back it up, he's either a no show or gets exposed for being overrated in the first place.

That’s funny; God’s existence makes it possible for you to make the statement above. You’re like the little child slapping her father in the face and thinking she is in charge all the while sitting on his lap and being held in his arms.

I am, when rationale is called for. You have yet to appeal to that side, I admit.

We both know that side of you does not exist, you evidence that fact quite often.

In completely and baseless theory, yes. In logic, hell no. Neither do you.

Sure I do.

But here's your big chance to prove otherwise. Explain how god "just is". And hey, just for the hell of it, try and make reasonable sense.

God’s being and existence are not contingent upon anything outside of Himself. That’s rather simple really. You’re the one who asked what caused a being that is by definition uncaused, what a silly question, “Who is married to that bachelor?” lol.

Fixed it for you.

Be careful…

Forum Rules

3.Quoting Others Accurately.
When using the quote function to quote other members, you may quote in whole or in part, but do not change the quoted text in any way. Breaking this rule will result in staff intervention. Depending on the circumstances surrounding the misquote(s), you may be warned or banned. Adding to the quoted text for clarification (ie. bolding, numbering, italics, etc.) is okay provided you indicate that the bolding and/or italics are yours and not the quoted member's and provided it doesn't change the meaning of the quoted text.

Actions.

How do you know their actions are necessarily consistent with what they are really thinking? How is that verifiable?

Never heard from or ever seen again anyone who's bit the dust.

How does that prove that they have ceased to exist?

You should stick with typos and spelling errors, because you suck at debating merits.

Lord knows you give me a lot of material to correct.

Once again you need the obvious to be stated and clarified.

Once again you do not seem to realize that appealing to that which you think is obvious is logically fallacious. Perhaps you should stick with making typos and misspellings.

Most people do not really believe in god, but they hope. Or, in many cases, they fear there may be a god.

Again, that’s an assertion. How do you know what most people really believe? Have you witnessed the actions of most people?

Your actions actually indicate that you are the one who really believes that God exists.

I don't believe your second premise was true.

So?

Do you see how this works, yet?

I don’t think you see how it works, if all parties agree upon a premise being false in a discussion that premise does not need to be proven false, we both agree that Thor does not exist so your syllogism was unsound. All parties in this discussion however do not agree that Yahweh does not exist.