Rationally irrefutable proof of God's existence

Yet biologists can identify each step in the evolution and development in a tree. And ask any engineer, a tree is a very impressive piece of engineering.

1 Like

Oh fuck! I’ve run out pf peanuts and it’s raining outside.

I have a novel idea. I think I’ll just ignore the fool. I use the term advisedly based on the depth of willful ignorance contained in his/her/its posts. Imo an obviously undereducated person too arrogant to learn . That makes him a fool.

I am perfectly impressed Prophet.
You use dazzling superlative and profound words to describe the mind and intentions of this omnipotent and ineffable god of your own imagined cosmos and your explanations about the meaning of life and yet your preaching remains vague and incomprehensible, inapplicable to reality and hence useless.
I expect you imagine yourself (as your chosen name suggests) as the familiar guru upon the mountain top dispensing divine wisdom. An image of perfect vanity and conceit.
I note you tend to gloss over contributions containing explanations or questions of physical realities and it must be that you only deal in abstractions, centred around the concept of perfection. What a perfect product to peddle!

Perfection as an abolute ideal, utterly intangible, beyond reasonable examination or critique and how much more profound than to insist on the idea of perfect reason to justify all things and everything without having to offer any substantial evidence? For any of it. All uncomfortable claims and criticisms brushed aside with a single wipe of perfect reason. Perfect. And you have demonstrated the versatility of your perfect reason to rationalise and ignore the suffering of children because they must not be 100% innocent or absolutely perfect like an imaginary triangle. At this point I start identifying the perfect evil in your fatuous pseudo intellectual vanity and the lack of empathetic humanity.

I have a cosmos of my own imagining too. In it my god is constantly revising a list of chemistry and physics questions for us to answer after we have died. My god demands a 75% result at the very least for a pass. He expects some reverence for the physical reality he took great pains to create and for the magnificent carbon based brains he endowed us with, specifically made to allow us to identify, marvel, measure, examine and participate with that very same incredible reality. He expects we were at least paying attention to the details and that we were actively engage with it and more especially with each other, during our lives rather than sitting on our arses on mountain tops or in family home basements, imagining we could abstractly comprehend the minds of omnipotent ineffable imagined deities.
In my cosmos, my god also includes a final quiz on the humanities, in which he asks what your favourite joke was. It better be good. He’s heard them all. Makes no sense does it? He’s a funny guy like that.

1 Like

A lie, and I’ve tried to give you the benefit of the doubt, but given the number of times you’ve used known common logical fallacies, and I and others, have explained them, I can no longer accept it is simply ignorance on your part, but rather it is relentless mendacity.

Another piece of repetitious sophistry. That’s your subjective interpretation of perfection for a start, and it’s your pure unevidenced assumption that existence achieves the arbitrary conclusion you have subjectively asserted as perfect.

Personally I can’t (hypothetically) see a rational reason for any being to deliberately create suffering, let alone torture children. Beyond it being cruel and sadistic.

Even if I had limitless power, I’d not torture anyone, let alone forever after they die, even those I perceived as thoroughly evil, like Hitler, or Stalin.

Another vapid tautology.

Unevidenced assumption, and irrational contradiction, as a deity with limitless power and knowledge and therefore choice, that also possesses limitless kindness, cannot rationally allow, let alone design and cause ANY suffering.

That is a semantical contradiction, and your idiotic hypocrisy has not gone unnoticed.

Oh no, everytime I open my heart.

Another theist plies his sententious superstitions wares, then having ignored all rational objections, runs away in smug self satisfaction.

I’m underwhelmed yet again.


AWWWWW fuck… This is just inane stupidity. My IQ is droping points by just breathing the air around this thread… The dweeb is not interested in discussion. This is preaching. “Time to go.”


Aww, just after I went out and got more peanuts…

You’re probably right. I’ve reached the point where I can no longer tell if it’s just a-common-or-garden variety fool or a troll. Beginning to suspect it’s probably the latter.

I’ve taken saying it will leave as a disingenuous promise which it has no intention of keeping . It needs assistance, but that’s up to the moderators. They’re pretty good and don’t tend to ban people just for being mendacious twats. :thinking:

Agreed. Anytime someone posts a reply to his proposals, he just dismisses it without proper discourse.

Actually, I think this one means it, and is dead serious in his/her “philosophical” scribblings. I got hold of the link to his/her website before it was redacted, and had a look around. It is filled to the brim with exactly the same kind of “god proofs” as he/she presented here. In other words, semantics is the main tool. For example, there is this long essay titled “Why it is Impossible for God’s Attributes to be Contradictory”. The three first sentences are:

Omnipotence = being able to do all that is doable (completely perfect/absolute power/freedom). That which is Omnipotent cannot be expected to “create a round square” because creating a round square cannot be classified as a doable thing. Since it is not a doable thing, it is irrelevant to Omnipotence.

And it gets worse from there. So my guess is that this is someone who got fixated on some idea, and is hell-bent on his/her mission. The person probably has some higher education at college or university, as the style of the argumentation and the vocabulary is typical has elements of academese.

I have encountered similar “god-proving” verbiage on other forums, and invariably these persons are blinded by their faith, and they are usually incapable of seeing mistakes and errors in their writings, even when it is pointed out to them and explained in excrutiating detail. It almost seems like it would be blasphemy for them to admit mistakes and correct them. Especially when atheists are pointing them out.

So my conclusion is: Not a troll. Just another highly religious person that is fixated on some idea, and cannot get out of their own semantical labyrinth.

If they prove that what they say is true, then I had been serving or committing to the wrong source. So if I go to someone who worships their boss, father, nation, or Zeus, and I show them that the only thing that one ought to be absolutely committed to is the perfect being: The infinite, omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent towards good, omnimalevolent towards evil, and they recognise that they are not meaningfully/semantically aware of a better being/existent than this, then that is what they ought to take as their God. If they are semantically/meaningfully unaware, then they are not responsible. They cannot be blamed or accused of betraying Good/God. They cannot be accused of being insincere to the semantics that they are aware of.

A truly perfect existence (an existence where good intent is actually good because it is actually rewarded. What good is good intent if it gets you cancer, MS, or Hell? It’s not good. It would be contradictory to call it good) is that which no greater than can be conceived of. A truly perfect existent/existence/being and God, meaningfully/semantically denote the exact same thing. You cannot have a truly perfect existence independent of God, and it is God’s existence that instantiates the truly perfect existence.

If it is goodness that one wants, then reason dictates that they ought to be committing to their sincerest conception of good. They ought to be sincere to the truth absolutely. They ought to be consistent and rational.

If you can’t make sense of that which I have already given you, then I think it’s out of my hands, and it’s not my concern.

Evil people deserve to suffer. I said it’s perfection for evil to suffer. I said it pretty clearly. That you did not pick up on this suggests that you have not read what I have presented with sufficient focus.

They get this, but they don’t respond because of bias and prejudice. They get this but because they worship themselves, their family, their nation, or some other source that is not Good/God (the perfect being/existent) they do not make good use of it (it being reason and their sense of goodness). As a result of this evil, bias, and prejudice, they are given what they deserve. Punishment. If they are given respite so that their free-willed potential is not wasted and their free-willed potential is potently evil, then maximum suffering (Hell) is perfection. Good’s Domination over evil is absolute. See the OP again with regard to what truly/indubitably exists.

It depends. If I think it sincere to God or a truly perfect existence to forgive, then I’d forgive. If I think that they are genuinely sorry, and the context is such that in relation to them I am the rich and they are the needy, then I will forgive them. Because in truth, God is the Rich/Self-Sufficient, and I am the needy/poor. And a perfect being would not feed me meaningful and fulfilling experiences (which are good for me) If I am not worthy of such things. And meaningfully/semantically speaking, it’s not good to be generous towards that which does not appreciate generosity. How can I said to be appreciative of generosity if I do not exercise generosity when an opportunity presents itself? It’s not good to forgive or show mercy to that which does not appreciate forgiveness or mercy. But to forgive unrepentant evil, or that which pretends to be sorry, is to embrace evil. Perfection dictates that you make evil suffer.

Look to how the people debate here. If you sincerely think their standards are good, then associate with them and side with them.

I am not omniscient. It may be that I am better than or equal to Muhammad or Jesus, it may also be that I am as bad as Hitler. I have my own empirical assumptions about myself, but empirical assumptions are not 100% like pure reason is. Empirically speaking, I am confident that my good outweighs my evil (though I’m not sure). But I’m sure that God is perfect and that triangles have three sides. Pure reason dictates that this way, I avoid self-righteousness.

If you are not aware of the semantics that I am aware of, then you will not meaningfully/semantically understand the OP until you become aware. If you are aware of the semantics but refuse to pay attention to them due to bias and prejudice or laziness, then that’s you either being insincere to the semantics you are aware of, or just you lacking passion for truth and goodness.

Again, matters of pure reason are 100%. Any given theory or belief that is proven to be contradictory (semantically inconsistent), is proven false by definition/semantics. This applies to empirical observations as well. In science, when an empirical observation results in semantical inconsistencies (contradictions) in a given theory, that theory is either abandoned, or reformulated.

It is 100% true that triangles have three sides. It is 100% that God exists. Proof is in the OP. If you can’t see it after all that has been said so far, then it’s no longer my concern. As in I no longer see it as good to try and get you to see.

Again, for x to learn to adapt to its environment, it must first have the ability to recognise things, and it must also the ability to learn. These abilities do not come from non-existence (see OP again for why that which truly exists is God). These abilities do not come independently of God. These are the dictates of pure reason.


You are a liar.

You are delusional. ** Delusions are defined as fixed, false beliefs that conflict with reality. Despite contrary evidence, a person in a delusional state can’t let go of these convictions.**

It is NOT 100% that god exists - YOU HAVE not proved anything, nor demonstrated ANYTHING.

THIS is true - until there is demonstrable EVIDENCE that this being exists IN REALITY all you have done is dig a delusional hole with your imperfect brain.

Sad really.

YOU may enjoy the false belief of your lies, your judgements your delusions - BUT you are on notice…

YOU have not responded to valid counter-arguments finding fault with your logic. You are preaching - NOT debating.

Should you continue in this course of dialogue, you will be silenced for a time to think about an intelligent and evidenced in reality RESPONSE

Your reasons for your belief are no different than any other delusional person and will not be tolerated. All that has been demonstrated is that false beliefs (those that do NOT comport with reality) can and do lead to foolishness.

1 Like

When I say to you a triangle has three sides, I highlight to you a matter of pure reason. It’s something that you just accept if you are aware of the semantic of triangle. See the OP again with regards to why it’s meaningfully/semantically absurd to reject God’s existence (like how it’s meaningfully/semantically absurd to reject a triangle having three-sides).

Also, the very fact that you do not take as an a priori truth that it’s perfection for everyone to get what they deserve (maintaining such standards, consistency would have you reject the three-sidedness of triangles), suggests that you are really misguided with regards to existing well. The level of misguidance suggested in your replies indicate that you’re not good at adapting to your environment.

You don’t seem to want evidence, or don’t seem to be able to recognise it.

I’ve debated in various places with various people. I have found this place to have the lowest standards.

Again, your posts suggest that you are misguided with regards to what it is to adapt well to you environment. Your post suggest that you either reject Karma, or have a very childish understanding of it. I made a difference to me. God Handles all affairs, any moment I experience that is good, is because God Willed it that way. Good looks, good health, good experiences, they are not given to you independently of God. Neither are bad experiences, ill-health, unattractiveness and so on. If you are given the latter (that which you dislike), then you have been punished and are being punished (if you continue to dislike). If you are given the latter, you are the needy, because you need to live or exist/be better. If you do not hate evil and love good (such that you love seeing evil aggravated), then your life is probably not that fulfilling. At least by my standards, it wouldn’t be.

Children are also taught about circles and squares from about the age of 2. These objects/shapes EXIST in reality…

YOUR level for evidence is your flawed thinking and arrogance. THIS lowly and imperfect “level” of evidence isn’t accepted in even the CIVIL Claims courts ran by mortal man.

WHY the fuck would you expect anyone to accept it, outside of your own mind?

Read MY post 112
YOU need to think before you respond.

1 Like

It is reminding me of a routine by Ron White… Every statement he gives gets debunked and so he says the exact same thing differently… The guy jus does not get that he can not “Assert or Think a god into existence.” He just does not get what anyone is talking about.

From Ron"
It’s like trying to get a dog that likes to kill chickens to stop killing chickens. He doesn’t even know what you are talking about.

“You gotta quit killing chickens”

“All right, let me see if I got this straight… I can still kill chickens.”

“Nooo You can’t kill chickens any more.”

“Alllllright! Let’s say I am in a hotel room with a chicken. Let’s say the chicken just wants to touch me. Can I kill that chicken?”

Does not matter what anyone says… he has a one track mind.

1 Like

…”what if the chicken is a circle :o: when it should be a triangle??? Can I kill it then???”

SIDE NOTE for dipshits A CHICKEN :chicken: is a chicken AND NEITHER a circle or a triangle.

@Get_off_my_lawn is clearly aware, as are we all, that your beliefs and bare assertions are dishonestly biased. This duplicitous act if yours, that you recognise some rational argument we don’t, is of course a lie. As has been amply demonstrated by your repeated inclusion of known common logical fallacies in your vapid rhetoric.

Or your ratuonal rational contradiction, that a deity with limitless power, knowledge and kindness would torture children. So your lie that others are using lazy or dishonest semantics, is also demonstrably rank hypocrisy.

Again, 100% what? You don’t even adhere to the most basic principles of logic, so why should anyone pay attention to your ludicrously grandiose claim, or your nauseatingly sententious preaching, that dishonestly ignores all rational objections.

That’s because the word is used to define a three sided shape, so this cretinous tautology is utterly meaningless.

Finally we see your dishonesty in asserting to be using logic, when in fact you are a closed minded bigot, who deals in vapid absolutes.

That’s a lie.

Then leave if you haven’t the integrity to properly defend your closed minded beliefs, as no one is interested in being preached at.

Bullshit, you don’t get to contradict scientific facts with blind superstition.

Those abilities come from evolution, the origins of life are unknown, your superstitious creation myths carry no weight without demonstrating sufficient objective evidence, and the thread OP is rank embarrassing nonsense. Your closed minded bias is amply quoted above, and here it is again…

You can’t even demonstrate that a deity is possible, and nothing can ever be asserted as 100% certain, it’s epistemologically impossible.

Except it isn’t, you’re simply embarrassing yourself, and don’t understand why.

Its superstitious nonsense. The idea of Karma is an utterly immoral one as well. As is amply demonstrated by you using this vile superstition to assert that torturing children is somehow moral, even an example of limitless kindness.

Your verbiage makes me sick.

Another lie, you’re the one denying objective scientific facts, so a hypocritical lie as well.

If it can be assumed a creator entity is perfect it should be able to create anything including something that is imperfect as proof of their perfect ability to create. And this would mean it could create evil, give it an identity, dress it up in horns and cloven feet and give it spooky names. YWHW admits to creating evil in Isaiah 45:7. It puzzles me why fundy Christians insist their supposedly omnipotent god is incapable of creating evil, we have the confession.

2 year olds get to play with shapes closer to “perfect” because MAN made them…

This is nature’s “perfect” triangles … lol

:flushed: your fucking idea of god can’t even “create” a perfect natural triangle

Is @Philosopher a fundie Christian or fundie Muslim??? He’s so fucked up in his mind it is unclear where his original brain was indoctrinated religiously.