Show me your proof

[A_Nony_Mouse]

I really wish Rhythm would actually give input rather than just smile at his own posts...

You said

If God is Existence, creation isn't such a difficult thing. Just like you and I can make a table from trees, God can make a tree from his own omnipotence.

1) The IF is not established.
2) I exist. God is existence. I am both existence and god. You are posting gibberish.
3) There is no evidence that trees existed prior to their evolution. Can but did not means it is only your speculation which is of no interest.

Your gibberish sucks.

[The Grand Nudger]

Whats the point in offering such bits of wisdom anyway? There's no way in hell you gave that comment I quoted any thought whatsoever. If the only way to shed light on something is by drawing a particularly inept analogy - then there might just be a problem with the concept one is trying to convey (that's assuming the bearer of knowledge is competent..and I'm willing to assume that for you, but maybe just this once).

Saying "it's like making a table" while clearly not considering what actually goes into a table-not appreciating what you have just stated, is precisely equivalent to saying "It's alot like -I have no fucking clue-". This is the point at which I start to feel sympathy for your comment, because I'm willing to bet that everything that goes into a table is as mysterious to you as any creation by god- hence the reason that it sounded god enough in your head to commit to the page. The comment itself went as unconsidered as all the work in the table (and frankly, as unconsidered as all the work in a gods creation- just poofs it out of his "omnipotence", pft).

Hows that for input?

[Tex]

I really wish Rhythm would actually give input rather than just smile at his own posts...

You said

If God is Existence, creation isn't such a difficult thing. Just like you and I can make a table from trees, God can make a tree from his own omnipotence.

1) The IF is not established.
2) I exist. God is existence. I am both existence and god. You are posting gibberish.
3) There is no evidence that trees existed prior to their evolution. Can but did not means it is only your speculation which is of no interest.

Your gibberish sucks.

1) Sorry about that, let me give you the reasoning here. I am, so I "participate in Being". I'm not the only thing in existence, so I participate in "Being" along with many other things. Since I participate in Being, I am not Being. However, Being is. If Being was not, I would not be able to participate in Being, and therefore would not be.

At this point we use the Euthyphro dilemma. Is God dependent on Being or is Being a creation of God? Well, if God was dependent on Being, he's not omnipotent and not God. If God made being, God had to exist to do that. Instead, just like with the Good, God is Being. He himself is uncaused and eternally existent.

2) You "participate in Being/Existence".

3) I'm not saying that trees existed prior to evolution. I'm saying God could, hypothetically, poof them into existence. I believe in evolution. The question that the whole "Being" thing addresses is, "Where did matter/energy come from in the first place?".

[smax]

What's that, to kill off all the life it's currently supporting?

Again, poor design.

Its perfect design. Fusion can't magically sustain itself forever. Magic is a terribly incoherent design.

If something is made from magic, why shouldn't it have magical properties?

---

indeed it is... so how did your creator make the universe, if not by magic?

If God is Existence, creation isn't such a difficult thing. Just like you and I can make a table from trees, God can make a tree from his own omnipotence.

I see. Well, gotta run, I'm all out of omnipotence. Gonna get me a fresh batch!

[Gearbreak]

There is no proof for god. That's the main reason there are people who don't believe in it. But the problem with arguing with something made up is you can keep making more shit up.

[ThomM]

You said

If God is Existence, creation isn't such a difficult thing. Just like you and I can make a table from trees, God can make a tree from his own omnipotence.

1) The IF is not established.
2) I exist. God is existence. I am both existence and god. You are posting gibberish.
3) There is no evidence that trees existed prior to their evolution. Can but did not means it is only your speculation which is of no interest.

Your gibberish sucks.

1) Sorry about that, let me give you the reasoning here. I am, so I "participate in Being". I'm not the only thing in existence, so I participate in "Being" along with many other things. Since I participate in Being, I am not Being. However, Being is. If Being was not, I would not be able to participate in Being, and therefore would not be.

At this point we use the Euthyphro dilemma. Is God dependent on Being or is Being a creation of God? Well, if God was dependent on Being, he's not omnipotent and not God. If God made being, God had to exist to do that. Instead, just like with the Good, God is Being. He himself is uncaused and eternally existent.

2) You "participate in Being/Existence".

3) I'm not saying that trees existed prior to evolution. I'm saying God could, hypothetically, poof them into existence. I believe in evolution. The question that the whole "Being" thing addresses is, "Where did matter/energy come from in the first place?".

Lets see
1- WE exist - and since you consider existence as being EVERYTHING that exists - then you a part of the existence. THe problem with your claim about a god is two fold -
First - none has ever been proven to exist -
Second - to claim a god had to exist to do something might be true - but you have not established that a god did anything

Gods are nothing more than FICTIONAL characters created by humans for use in ancient religious Myths and Legends - there have been thousands so far named - and none have ever been established to have any reality beyond fiction.

2 - Yes - we are all part of what exists - in life and in death.

3 - Your question - where did matter/energy come from in the first place - iis the old theist claim that everything had to have an origin - except of course for your god. Since YOU make an exception for your god - then you must understand that it is possible that something has ALWAYS existed - ie - matter and energy. AS far as a god "poofing" anything into existence - in a fictional story - you can have your god poof - in reality they do not exist to do it.

[A_Nony_Mouse]

You said

If God is Existence, creation isn't such a difficult thing. Just like you and I can make a table from trees, God can make a tree from his own omnipotence.

1) The IF is not established.
2) I exist. God is existence. I am both existence and god. You are posting gibberish.
3) There is no evidence that trees existed prior to their evolution. Can but did not means it is only your speculation which is of no interest.

Your gibberish sucks.

1) Sorry about that, let me give you the reasoning here. I am, so I "participate in Being". I'm not the only thing in existence, so I participate in "Being" along with many other things. Since I participate in Being, I am not Being. However, Being is. If Being was not, I would not be able to participate in Being, and therefore would not be.

At this point we use the Euthyphro dilemma. Is God dependent on Being or is Being a creation of God? Well, if God was dependent on Being, he's not omnipotent and not God. If God made being, God had to exist to do that. Instead, just like with the Good, God is Being. He himself is uncaused and eternally existent.

2) You "participate in Being/Existence".

3) I'm not saying that trees existed prior to evolution. I'm saying God could, hypothetically, poof them into existence. I believe in evolution. The question that the whole "Being" thing addresses is, "Where did matter/energy come from in the first place?".

You missed something very important. Everything above is nothing more than argumentation. Argumentation is worthless. Only physical evidence matters. You have still not established 1) so it remains an unfounded hypothetical. Thus 2) and 3) are extensions of this unfounded gibberish.

That you cannot produce physical evidence does not give your gibberish any merit whatsoever.

[Tex]

If something is made from magic, why shouldn't it have magical properties?

I never said it was magically made.

Lets see
1- WE exist - and since you consider existence as being EVERYTHING that exists - then you a part of the existence. THe problem with your claim about a god is two fold -
First - none has ever been proven to exist -
Second - to claim a god had to exist to do something might be true - but you have not established that a god did anything

Gods are nothing more than FICTIONAL characters created by humans for use in ancient religious Myths and Legends - there have been thousands so far named - and none have ever been established to have any reality beyond fiction.

2 - Yes - we are all part of what exists - in life and in death.

3 - Your question - where did matter/energy come from in the first place - iis the old theist claim that everything had to have an origin - except of course for your god. Since YOU make an exception for your god - then you must understand that it is possible that something has ALWAYS existed - ie - matter and energy. AS far as a god "poofing" anything into existence - in a fictional story - you can have your god poof - in reality they do not exist to do it.

1) You didn't address number 1.

2) We are all a part of what exists. In death, we no longer exist. At the very least, the matter of my body turns into worm and maggot food.

3) My God has a valid reason for not having an origin. He is innately Being. Matter/energy do not innately exist, else there would be an infinite amount of matter/energy. Last I heard, the universe was finite.

You missed something very important. Everything above is nothing more than argumentation. Argumentation is worthless. Only physical evidence matters. You have still not established 1) so it remains an unfounded hypothetical. Thus 2) and 3) are extensions of this unfounded gibberish.

That you cannot produce physical evidence does not give your gibberish any merit whatsoever.

What physical evidence do you have that says physical evidence is the only evidence that matters?

Nevertheless, I'm pretty sure that my existence, your existence, or other things existence's are pretty solid empirical pieces of data. I don't understand your problem.

[Foxaèr]

Nevertheless, I'm pretty sure that my existence, your existence, or other things existence's are pretty solid empirical pieces of data.

One's existence is no more proof of a deity's existence than the world around us.

[Tex]

One's existence is no more proof of a deity's existence than the world around us.

I think they're equally self evident.