prove or disprove this

“(a) if an all-knowing God exists, then he knows preciesely what the future is (he knows im going to cough in ten seconds)

(b) if God knows what the future is then the future will accur, unless God is mistaken (i will cough in ten seconds)

(c) because god cannot be mistaken there is no possibility that any other future other than the future which god knows will happen
(there is no possibility i wont couch in ten seconds

(d) if god exists there is only one future, the future he knows. (i cough in ten seconds)” blink, by ted dekker

I moved this to the Off-Topic forum since it’s not properly a hoax.  However, I’m not really sure what the purpose is other than stirring up an argument, or at the very least, a spelling lesson.  I expect this to devolve into a ‘prove he exists’ vs. ‘prove he doesn’t exist’ argument inside of ten comments.

*sigh*
We’ve been so free of the religious debates on here up until now.

How about:
e) You can be happy in your knowledge that god does or does not exist, without having to enter into a pointless and self-perpetuating debate.

I choose E (and the option that God doesn’t exist) and lock….

Oh, wait, I can’t choose lock….please, someone do it.

By the way, use capitalization.

my input:

God may know what will happen (if he exists), but we don’t. He knows if you’ll fail or succeed, but we don’t. That’s why you can’t base all your life’s decisions around him. No-one knows what he/she is thinking or if he’she is real. did that make sense?

The original poster’s list boils down to just one assumption: that an All-knowing God exists. Points a to d are just deductions from that original assumption, and not arguments that prove the assumption. Hence, I do not see the point of this post.

Like the rest however, I do see that this might be the start of yet another flaming thread on Faith. This is a hoax forum however, not an Evangelization platform.

hmmm, as it has been pointed out, the actual issue here is proving or disproving the existance of an all knowing, creator or deity (usually referred to as God but some religions use other names (Buddha for one).

This issue is thousands of years old and some of the finest minds ever put on earth have addressed it.

With the information currently available, it is impossible to prove or disprove and like Boo stated “You can be happy in your knowledge that god does or does not exist, without having to enter into a pointless and self-perpetuating debate.” (i would add unwinnable)

I hope I am not perpetuating the debate (what debate?) 

chuck- buddha is not seen as a god.

sort of a mix between j.c. and confu.

not debateing

obviously I have not yet attained complete enlightenment

Chuck - 01 October 2005 06:33 PM

obviously I have not yet attained complete enlightenment

That’s because you do not pay your electricity bills….

LaMa!