Page 26 of 38
Re: Jesus H
Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 4:45 pm
by caribe
Clevis Hitch wrote:do you believe in me. Do you believe I exist? I'm not in front of you. Is it possible that a being (I'm a being,to) can exist and not be seen?
I will reconsider this after god posts. Furthermore don't you dare post about the wind, those are atoms and molecules in the air. There is no wind in a vacuum. As a matter of fact your line of reasoning is going to be ONE of the most direct lines of reason to atheism. This one is booby trapped, backup now.
Re: Jesus H
Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 4:50 pm
by Shamis
Clevis Hitch wrote:do you believe in me. Do you believe I exist? I'm not in front of you. Is it possible that a being (I'm a being,to) can exist and not be seen?
I don't believe in you. You are clearly an automated trollbot.
Re: Jesus H
Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 5:08 pm
by climb2core
Clevis Hitch wrote:do you believe in me. Do you believe I exist? I'm not in front of you. Is it possible that a being (I'm a being,to) can exist and not be seen?
I have entered text and posted. I have seen people enter text and post. I believe that a person entered the quoted text above and posted. I believe that you CAN be seen.
When I get a post from God and he agrees to meet me at Drive by crag to catch a sack of sand for a $1000 bet (and shows up to give me his $$$) I will believe in him too.
Silly Clevis.
Re: Jesus H
Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 5:11 pm
by ynot
If you atiests put as much thought and conviction into your climbing you could climb two numbers harder. I'm just sayin..
Re: Jesus H
Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 5:23 pm
by mike_a_lafontaine
caribe wrote:I will reconsider this after god posts.
That still wouldn't convince me. I've seen too many Star Trek episodes where "God" just turned out to be an alien with superior technology...technology that wasn't made to recon with the moxy and bravado of one James T. Kirk...
Re: Jesus H
Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 6:03 pm
by caribe
mike_a_lafontaine wrote:caribe wrote:I will reconsider this after god posts.
That still wouldn't convince me. I've seen too many Star Trek episodes where "God" just turned out to be an alien with superior technology...technology that wasn't made to recon with the moxy and bravado of one James T. Kirk...
agreed.
Re: Jesus H
Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 6:05 pm
by caribe
ynot wrote:If you atiests put as much thought and conviction into your climbing you could climb two numbers harder. I'm just sayin..
Jesse I do put more " " and still end up hitting the wall.
Re: Jesus H
Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 8:06 pm
by climb2core
ynot wrote:If you atiests put as much thought and conviction into your climbing you could climb two numbers harder. I'm just sayin..
If I put as much effort into the God thing as climbing, I am pretty sure I could mathematically either prove or disprove his/her existence.
Re: Jesus H
Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:12 pm
by clif
where'd dhuff go?
what if god is like the visualizing and sharma 'believing' he can climb parts of climbing. maybe god only immanentizes if you acknowledge limits to your reason.
what created the vacuum? if matter is not god, is a vacuum? failing to define god is not an argument against it's phenomenology.
Re: Jesus H
Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:41 pm
by Climbingrocks
clif wrote:where'd dhuff go?
what if god is like the visualizing and sharma 'believing' he can climb parts of climbing. maybe god only immanentizes if you acknowledge limits to your reason.
what created the vacuum? if matter is not god, is a vacuum? failing to define god is not an argument against it's phenomenology.
This makes no sense.