You cannot prove a negative. Example: Can you prove dayglow orange wombats with purple mohawks don't exist? Have you looked on EVERY planet in the universe? Every cave? Every burrow? Every zoo? Every private collection? See how impossible that is?

But you CAN prove they DO exist…with one simple picture or testable example.

This is why we cannot prove gods don't exist. But we can prove gods DO exist by providing evidence. So where is the evidence?

It's safe to say they don't exist or not believe they exist until evidence is provided indicating otherwise.

Why must I prove to another person God exists? If after looking at the whole creation, a person is still convinced there is no God, their choice should be respected no matter how stupid it sounds.

SocialJustice:
Why must I prove to another person God exists? If after looking at the whole creation, a person is still convinced there is no God, their choice should be respected no matter how stupid it sounds.

But you are convinced that no one created god right?

How can god exist by himself without a creator as well?

God is the universe itself..

God is existence itself....

Not some humanoid entity somewhere...

God is the universe itself..

God is existence itself....

Not some humanoid entity somewhere...

Even the ancient Babylonian understood that, why don't the modern man ?

This is Marduk with the universe as his garments...

Workch:
But you are convinced that no one created god right?

How can god exist by himself without a creator as well?

Do I look like someone up for stupid argument this morning that only feeds ego and nothing else?

SocialJustice:
Do I look like someone up for stupid argument this morning that only feeds ego and nothing else?

Why do you think that a healthy debate about how things work is all about ego?
Are you suffering from cognitive dissonance?

Workch:
Why do you think that a healthy debate about how things work is all about ego?
Are you suffering from cognitive dissonance?

There is nothing healthy about this debate and people hardly change, they either seek reinforcers of their views or feed their ego.

SocialJustice:
There is nothing healthy about this debate and people hardly change, they either seek reinforcers of their views or feed their ego.

I am willing to change if I see verifiable and repeatable evidence.
You should also be willing to change if you don’t see any

Workch:
I am willing to change if I see verifiable and repeatable evidence.
You should also be willing to change if you don’t see any

Again, I said only a stupid person sees the intricacies of creation and says there's no God or source of creation. In case you missed it the first time.

If you can look at the creation and not see God, I can't help you.

SocialJustice:


If you can look at the creation and not see God, I can't help you.

What is the creation?

SocialJustice:
Again, I said only a stupid person sees the intricacies of creation and says there's no God or source of creation. In case you missed it the first time.

If you can look at the creation and not see God, I can't help you.

only a stupid person thinks that a more intricate god that created this intricate universe cannot have a creator

sonmvayina:
God is the universe itself..

God is existence itself....

Not some humanoid entity somewhere...

Even the ancient Babylonian understood that, why don't the modern man ?

This is Marduk with the universe as his garments...

sonmvayina:


God gave his laws to all of humanity..

The Jewish version is called the Torah..

God's laws are universal..

Your god has to be the most confusing god on Nairaland. Your god is simultaneously the universe, a garment worn by Marduk, a male humanoid who gives instructions on mountains, and a lawgiver who produced Jewish beliefs.

SocialJustice:
Again, I said only a stupid person sees the intricacies of creation and says there's no God or source of creation. In case you missed it the first time.

If you can look at the creation and not see God, I can't help you.

Which God exactly?
Why one? Why not 2, or 10?

Wilgrea7:


Which God exactly?
Why one? Why not 2, or 10?

There is only one...

That's why it is called a UNIverse

KnownUnknown:

Your god has to be the most confusing god on Nairaland. Your god is simultaneously the universe, a garment worn by Marduk, a male humanoid who gives instructions on mountains, and a lawgiver who produced Jewish beliefs.

Walahi talahi you dey craz and no be small crez o na bigggggggggg one!

SocialJustice:
Why must I prove to another person God exists? If after looking at the whole creation, a person is still convinced there is no God, their choice should be respected no matter how stupid it sounds.

I wonder o

If they do not know how to use their eyes, what is my own now? Is it not them who will stumble and cry for falling down?

Workch:
But you are convinced that no one created god right?

How can god exist by himself without a creator as well?

Simple! It does not matter. You can never know exactly like your mannequin can wonder till it enters fire why you, it's maker, is not made of plastic or manufactured from a factory like him.

This is where our knowledge ends and it can never get past this Wall.

And the most important Truth is That God is The Boss.

Workch:
only a stupid person thinks that a more intricate god that created this intricate universe cannot have a creator

Only a stupid person is presumptuous as a mannequin thinking because it is made of plastic therefore it's maker is made of plastic.

Wilgrea7:


Which God exactly?
Why one? Why not 2, or 10?

Told you many times, Two kings can not rule one land.

KnownUnknown:

Your god has to be the most confusing god on Nairaland. Your god is simultaneously the universe, a garment worn by Marduk, a male humanoid who gives instructions on mountains, and a lawgiver who produced Jewish beliefs.

That is the product of extreme lunacy drug ingested madness!

Dtruthspeaker:


I wonder o

If they do not know how to use their eyes, what is my own now? Is it not them who will stumble and cry for falling down?

Lol, nobody is stumbling and falling. I'm empathetic to their view because we're all 2 sides of a coin. Despite our different views, none of us have God in our personal experience but we choose to believe why they don't.

Their views naturally are just the result of the educational system which is based on empiricism-Seeing to believe.

SocialJustice:
Lol, nobody is stumbling and falling. I'm empathetic to their view because we're all 2 sides of a coin. Despite our different views, none of us have God in our personal experience but we choose to believe why they don't.

Their views naturally are just the result of the educational system which is based on empiricism-Seeing to believe.

Okay!

We are not on the same coin, they are elsewhere.

I see them falling down a lot until they get to the point where they are tired of getting up. Then something comes to crush them as they are lying down what a way to live and die! anyway, their problem.

However, we all have seen that some people see, yet they do not see else they wouldn't have fallen for that prostitute or dealt with that criminal.

Dtruthspeaker:


Told you many times, Two kings can not rule one land.

And I've given you examples of how multiple people can come together as a team to create something

Wilgrea7:


And I've given you examples of how multiple people can come together as a team to create something

Always changing the argument.

Create is not Rule.

And God is about Rule. A King is about Rule.

SocialJustice:
Do I look like someone up for stupid argument this morning that only feeds ego and nothing else?

You really don't have a point

Apologies for not seeing this earlier

Dtruthspeaker:


Always changing the argument.

Create is not Rule.

And God is about Rule. A King is about Rule.

I've told you before that rulership is not always singular. Even today, we have situations that are presided over by councils, rather than a single person.

Rulership can of course be singular. But it doesn't always have to be.

Wilgrea7:
Apologies for not seeing this earlier
I've told you before that rulership is not always singular. Even today, we have situations that are presided over by councils, rather than a single person.
Rulership can of course be singular. But it doesn't always have to be...

And the real eyeity shows rulership is singular. Even in the councils we see "A single person still presides (rules) over the council.

The real eyeity shows 2 kings can never rule a land. That is what it is.

Confused agnostic
We have not seen the Creator God
But from the things made, we can conclude that he exists

For example, at a time, people never knew about what causes diseases but the use of lens and microscope helped them to see that microorganisms are the causes of some diseases
There are also tools or instruments that helped us know we have clusters, galaxies, atoms, we are still discovering things

Humans want to see God in order to believe he exists. Let them go and invent such instruments na. They are awed by his creative works but instead of acknowledging God, they acknowledge 'mother nature's.
Let them first come to convince that there is no Creator God.
They themselves know it is foolish to believe that something does not exist simply because we can't see it, hear it or measure it. God is not wind, air, temperature or gravity or time or space.
They can't measure the beginning of time or space. The concept is too wonderful to contemplate. How much more the Creator?

Is life and the universe the work of a Creator or they came by Chance?

Confused theist, outside of those forged jewish books, your Israelite god, Jehovah doesn’t exist.

Dtruthspeaker:


And the real eyeity shows rulership is singular. Even in the councils we see "A single person still presides (rules) over the council.

The real eyeity shows 2 kings can never rule a land. That is what it is.

You seem to be making a false equivocation here. Being the ruler or "president" of a council doesn't imply complete control over the council like that of a king would imply.

A king has sole authority over every aspect of his kingdom. Whatever he says, stands. He can fire, hire, and change anyone. He calls the final shots on what goes on in every aspect of the kingdom.

I'll give a simple example. The EU parliament. Even though the parliament has a president, this president cannot decide by themselves, what goes on in each of the individual member states. Neither can they single-handedly make decisions without the agreement of all individual member states.

Another example is the house of congress (US), or similarly the senate here in Nigeria. By virtue of the system in place, not even the president of the country can fire the individuals in these councils. And also, the president of these councils cannot make independent decisions, without the approval of other council members.

I gave you two examples to (hopefully and clearly) illustrate my point. That rulership is NOT always singular. There are different systems of power distribution that exist in our world today. It is not always a king-kingdom situation.