Deity Existence - Page 45

**Hraesvelg** · 05-02-2009, 07:31 PM

That's your problem right there. Anything is not possible. It isn't possible for you to produce an elephant from an orifice of your choosing. It isn't possible for you to fly to the moon under your own power. It isn't possible for you to have a cup of tea with Napoleon.

Jikanu · 05-02-2009, 07:56 PM

Im saying in the realm of the spiritual and the supernatural, anything is possible. it's possible for us to appreciate fine music and express ourselves where snails cant, so who's to say that there arent higher beings than us?

**Vasu** · 05-03-2009, 02:46 AM

Who's to say that there aren't higher beings than those higher beings? And higher than those? And higher than those? Infinite regressions all over again. The problem is not hypothesising a deity to explain our existence as long as you can come up with some kind of explanation to support it's own existence. he problem is adding all this excess baggage.

And what rules did god set for himself, and how do you know that he did?

Jikanu · 05-03-2009, 06:33 AM

Sorry, i ment to say PERHAPS he set some rules for himself.

And im talking about the ultimately higher being; there are probably beings in between, but by deffinition, the ultimate deity is God.

pigspark · 05-03-2009, 07:41 AM

their again is another thing their is no real proof of gods existence except in stories and things and again u cant just say their COULD be a things in between cause their again is no proof so wht u ar trying to say Jik is tht u are thinking ahead without smelling the coffe u are saying wht Could happen but is no proof

Jikanu · 05-03-2009, 07:51 AM

...that made zero sense due to the mispelling... but i'll try to respond.

There is some proof, but it isnt quite deffinitive. however, there's no proof against it.

pigspark · 05-03-2009, 07:54 AM

No spelling mistakes i just made it shorter saves time. anyway i didnt say I was against I was saying tht Their is no solid proof of almighty god and things

**Hraesvelg** · 05-03-2009, 08:01 AM

Punctuation would really help you out a bit, mate. Unfortunately, Jik's responses shows that he hasn't really read and/or absorbed anything Vasu or I've said thus far. We're really spinning our wheels at this point.

**Vasu** · 05-03-2009, 08:10 AM

Yeah, he's gone back to saying "There's no proof against it, so it could be true, and I know of no other explanation, so it must be true."

pigspark · 05-03-2009, 08:21 AM

yeah thats true and Hrae i am just shortening the words their is no punctuation prob. any way Jik isnt really get wht the ppl ar saying