Evidence for the existence of God

[Grey Acumen]

Copycon said:
Grey Acumen:

"Arguing against the existence..."

The better safe than sorry does not prove gods existence

"Man, by nature is imperfect, but must also strive towards perfection."

Que, by what standards?

"God is no longer a source of perfection and man loses a critical incorruptible role model that is necessary for society to flourish."

Nietzsche discusses this, Habermas and Foucault too. I don't think any one of those guys believe(ed) in god, but they are discussing the need to anchor morals, ideas and ideals to absolutes. Postmetaphysical approaches are about this kind of issues, but it shows not that god is needed in anoher way than as guidance.


"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."

There are no evidence that he exists, and there is no way to disprove his existence, so the discussion about god existense is from a popperian perspective not science at all, since it's nothing that you can falsify.

 Did you even listen to anything I said? Why are you going through and saying "this doesn't proveanything, that doesn't prove anything" i'm not proving anything, that part about the parachute was meant to point out the pointlessness of arguing agaisnt god's existence. There's nothing to accomplish by arguing it.

And your last statement is innacurate: There is no PROOF of the existence of God, there is plenty of evidence