# Proof that god exists

amolv06
Spirituality 19 Mar '10 19:44
1. 19 Mar '10 19:442 edits
Premise:

e^(i*pi)=-1

1.) Assume e^(i*pi)=-1. That -1 looks almost like a -7. Ergo, we can say that e^(i*pi)=-7.

2.) But 7 rhymes with heaven! Therefore heaven must exists!

3.) But heaven is where god exists. If heaven exists, god must exist.

4.) Combing #3 + #4 = god exists!

My logic is infallible.
2. 19 Mar '10 20:21
Ok God, You have convinced me.
3. 19 Mar '10 21:57
Originally posted by amolv06
Premise:

e^(i*pi)=-1

1.) Assume e^(i*pi)=-1. That -1 looks almost like a -7. Ergo, we can say that e^(i*pi)=-7.

2.) But 7 rhymes with heaven! Therefore heaven must exists!

3.) But heaven is where god exists. If heaven exists, god must exist.

4.) Combing #3 + #4 = god exists!

My logic is infallible.
if i tell you you aren't funny, will you assume that religious folks have no sense of humor and only a superior intellect can grasp your joke?
4. 20 Mar '10 02:56
Originally posted by Zahlanzi
if i tell you you aren't funny, will you assume that religious folks have no sense of humor and only a superior intellect can grasp your joke?
No, I'll simply cover my ears, scream lalala, and continue operating under the assumption that I am hilarious. And brilliantly correct.
5. 20 Mar '10 03:091 edit
Originally posted by amolv06
Premise:

e^(i*pi)=-1

1.) Assume e^(i*pi)=-1. That -1 looks almost like a -7. Ergo, we can say that e^(i*pi)=-7.

2.) But 7 rhymes with heaven! Therefore heaven must exists!

3.) But heaven is where god exists. If heaven exists, god must exist.

4.) Combing #3 + #4 = god exists!

My logic is infallible.
But if you take the cotangent of your logic and multiply it by the square root of your premise, they cancel each other out.

Wait a second, I am a theist, I should be trying to help you. Curses, foiled again!! ðŸ˜
6. Agerg
The 'edit'or
20 Mar '10 19:163 edits
Originally posted by amolv06
Premise:

e^(i*pi)=-1

1.) Assume e^(i*pi)=-1. That -1 looks almost like a -7. Ergo, we can say that e^(i*pi)=-7.

2.) But 7 rhymes with heaven! Therefore heaven must exists!

3.) But heaven is where god exists. If heaven exists, god must exist.

4.) Combing #3 + #4 = god exists!

My logic is infallible.
1.) Assume e^(i*pi)=-1...
Assuming a fact...ok...
1)...That -1 looks almost like a -7
Does it bollox!!! -1 looks like a tap. Ergo e^(i*pi) =-1 looks like a tap
2.) But 7 rhymes with heaven! Therefore heaven must exists!
correcting your mistake above, "tap" rhymes with "cr*p" Therefore cr*p exists in your whole post
3.) But heaven is where god exists. If heaven exists, god must exist.
We have shown thus far your argument (particularly at #2) contains cr*p,; hence you cannot deduce #3 from #2
4.) Combing #3 + #4 = god exists!
self referencing statement.

Your logic 0 - utter nonsense 1

ðŸ™‚
7. 20 Mar '10 19:311 edit
So you have deduced that such arguments are utter nonsense. Interesting.

/sigh. I have given you the proof. It's sad when you shine the light right into people's eyes, yet they refuse to see it.
8. Agerg
The 'edit'or
20 Mar '10 19:39
Originally posted by amolv06
So you have deduced that such arguments are utter nonsense. Interesting.

/sigh. I have given you the proof. It's sad when you shine the light right into people's eyes, yet they refuse to see it.
So you have deduced that such arguments are utter nonsense
I wouldn't go that far... replace "such" with "my"

ðŸ™‚
9. 20 Mar '10 20:35
Now you're just hatin' cause I've seen the light.
10. Agerg
The 'edit'or
20 Mar '10 20:45
Originally posted by amolv06
Now you're just hatin' cause I've seen the light.
I don't hate you

ðŸ™‚
11. 20 Mar '10 21:34
Originally posted by amolv06
Now you're just hatin' cause I've seen the light.
Okay, we've had a good chuckle from your joke. Now on a little more serious vain.

How do you know that reasoning leads to truth ?
12. 20 Mar '10 22:27
Originally posted by jaywill
Okay, we've had a good chuckle from your joke. Now on a little more serious vain.

How do you know that reasoning leads to truth ?
I never made this claim, nor do I think it invariably does.
13. 21 Mar '10 02:132 edits
Originally posted by amolv06
I never made this claim, nor do I think it invariably does.
So then if your formula actually did prove the existence of God we would have to base that belief on a kind of faith that reasoning can lead to truth.

Undergirding your formula is an underlying "faith" that mathematical reasoning can lead to truth.

But we cannot prove that it does.

Of course the Bible doesn't wait for you to have to realize that. It tells you right up front that this truth about God's existence is known by faith.

Or faith PLUS God's faithfulNESS.
14. 21 Mar '10 02:42
Originally posted by jaywill
So then if your formula actually did prove the existence of God we would have to base that belief on a kind of faith that reasoning can lead to truth.

Undergirding your formula is an underlying "faith" that mathematical reasoning can lead to truth.

But we cannot prove that it does.

Of course the Bible doesn't wait for you to have to realize t ...[text shortened]... ruth about God's existence is known by faith.

Or faith PLUS God's [b]faithfulNESS.
[/b]
"It tells you right up front that this truth about God's existence is known by faith."

Now hold on there brother. It seems to me that Romans 1 makes it clear that creation is proof of God's existence.

At least that's the way I see it, but I would like to hear your reply.
15. 21 Mar '10 02:47
Originally posted by josephw
[b]"It tells you right up front that this truth about God's existence is known by faith."

Now hold on there brother. It seems to me that Romans 1 makes it clear that creation is proof of God's existence.

At least that's the way I see it, but I would like to hear your reply.[/b]
I might be wrong.