Bartikus wrote:
So you agree God would not have to see and think like you?
I think I've been pretty clear about that. IF (being the keyword) god existed, I don't think that we'd have to see and think congruently.
Bartikus wrote:
yet....
This would not make your statement about "THIS IS HOW IT WOULD/should SHOW ITSELF.....ridiculous?
This statement is backed up by your own words.
No it's not Bart. You just don't have the grounds to back up your claim. Remove God and interject the flying spagetti monster, I won't argue semantics, it's not the point right here.
The point is quite simply that a person singing, people reacting, etc is no evidence whatsoever that god exists. The only reason Tsunamis get brought up is that tsunamis are no doubt a part of nature and cetainly a better means to illustrate a supernatural presence. If there was a god, I would expect evidence, you have not provided any. It is not ridiculous for any individual to have some expectation on a given theoretical circumstance.
IF a meteor hit the earth
IF Aliens attacked
IF Zombies rose from the earth
If god existed
Your objection is out of line. There is nothing ridiculous about someone pointing out the very obvious notion that if you were a god and were leaving evidence around, you might choose better means than giving a person a singing voice. So back it up or shut up.
Bartikus wrote:
You make no sense whatsoever.
I believe you created a thread on evidece of god then posted a link to youtube. Your idea sucked, deal with it.
T
K
O