I shall sum up this entire thread and all the arguments therein:
"SEE!? I'm able to point out minor flaws in your arguments, thus you don't know what you're talking about, therefor the answer you think is right must be wrong, whereas MY erroneous logic proves that my answer is obviously correct and indisputable!"
Arguing against the existence of God is like trying to argue that the parachute we packed won't open after we've already jumped out of the plane. So what? We're supposed to toss it then? Flap our arms really hard? Just wait for the end without attempting anything? Thanks, but I'll keep the parachute.
Man, by nature is imperfect, but must also strive towards perfection. Even if somehow, however impossible it is, man is the source of God, by accepting this view, God is no longer a source of perfection and man loses a critical incorruptible role model that is necessary for society to flourish.
So on one side, you have the fact that God does exist, and thus it should be accepted that he exists, and on the other side, whether god exists or not he NEEDS to exist, and thus is should be accepted that he exists.
![]() |
Seppukuties is like LBP Lite, on crack. Play it already!Currently wrapped up in: Half Life, Portal, and User Created Source Mods
|








