I'm beginning to think that I needs proof that God really exist.
Has anyone felt like me?
I strongly believe that we can all read this, so we can know more about the existence of God.

https://allsinglesandmarried..com/2019/08/do-you-think-god-really-exist.html?m=1

Allsingles:
I'm beginning to think that I needs proof that God really exist.
Has anyone felt like me?
I strongly believe that we can all read this, so we can know more about the existence of God.

https://allsinglesandmarried..com/2019/08/do-you-think-god-really-exist.html?m=1

Begin by holding wind with your fist, snap it and post it here, we shall take it from there.

Drink irresponsibly

And see what runs through your mind when you dead drunk.

You will be closer to the realms that you evolve around.

Pvssy:
Drink irresponsibly

And see what runs through your mind when you dead drunk.

You will be closer to the realms that you evolve around.

Dude there are drugs that can do that with as little as one tablet

Allsingles:
I'm beginning to think that I needs proof that God really exist.
Has anyone felt like me?
I strongly believe that we can all read this, so we can know more about the existence of God.

https://allsinglesandmarried..com/2019/08/do-you-think-god-really-exist.html?m=1

Let me help you with the basics:

There are two types of proof in principle.

Deductive proof
Inductive proof

Deductive proof that types of argument reliant sorely on logic.
Example: Mathematics is deductive in nature.

A = B
B = C

Therefore C = A.

This is a deductive exercise.

Deductive proofs can be employed to pinpoint logical factors responsible for a certain conclusion.

You can through your apparent observations on race in the planet, that colder region seem to have light skinned races with wooly hairs, hotter regions seems to have more swarthier races to deductively postulate that skin color is correlated with climactic conditions.


Inductive proofs are type of proofs that are empirical in nature.

Take the race example I gave above, Inductive approach would include, having isolated tests, delving deeper into racial DNA to conclusively empirically show the correlation between climate and skin color.

So, while you can say that inductive arguments are appeal to empiricism or reduction to the senses, you can say that deductivism is appeal to sorely reason.

To the question of God, you must first understand what God by definition is;

God by definition is transcendental meaning it is of no observational consequence to this space - time.

There is absolutely no one that can provide empirical proof of God, there is no such thing. If you are asking for empirical proof then there can be no such thing since appeal to empricism would contradict God as a definition.

God was postulated in human philosophy through deduction. (Meaning; It is a logical approximation that may or may not be real)

In philosophical connotations "God is a conclusion reached through apperception, that's sorely through reason. It cannot be related to the external senses, cannot be perceived, only conceived, can be defined but not demonstrated"

So, if you are looking for deductive arguments for God, you may look at God as deduced through ontology.

So, in other words, you must first define the type of proof you are seeking in order to proceed.

Pvssy:
Drink irresponsibly

And see what runs through your mind when you dead drunk.

You will be closer to the realms that you evolve around.

Anas09:

Begin by holding wind with your fist, snap it and post it here, we shall take it from there.

The type of nonsense you guys post here these days is the stuff of weed

johnydon22:
The type of nonsense you guys post here these days is the stuff of weed

Lmao..As in
I'd advise you don't stress yourself on the delusive nature of the OP post..It's rhetorical which ultimately leads you to the link(if you didn't check it out)