Hey, I totally agree that God doesn’t exist. I just recognise that this particular argument is extremely weak at best.
There seems to be a lot of people who think God ought to come to them, and reveal himself. A lot of other people believe He already has revealed Himself. What to do? So you call God out as in a “B” western to prove Himself, but He doesn’t show. Maybe God just understands your game and doesn’t wish to play. More likely you don’t understand God’s game nor wish to play. It doesn’t matter, the world keeps turning, events keep churning. Life goes on, the play is not yet over.
No, he’s saying that the veracity and value of a concept are determined by the quality of the argument forwarded by the creator of the concept.
When it comes to this argument, that is true.
No. That statement is not made with regards to your argument to the proof of God’s existence. If you claimed that the animals came to you in a dream and gave you a revelation in interpretive dance that animal cruelty is wrong, and that is all the reason you need to believe something, then, yes, you would be an embarrassment to those who would agree with you.
You’re postulating an omnipotent being which you call “God”. If what He wanted was to “convince a whole bunch of SD atheists of his existence”, what He could do would be to simply change our minds to make us believe. Now, He doesn’t do this, so I guess He either doesn’t exist, or He exists but doesn’t want this bunch of atheists to start believing in His existence. So what use was your proposition to Him? You’re not offering Him anything He can’t get Himself if He so wants.
This seems pretty obvious to me. God did kill Valteron. Now Satan is posting with his account so we believe God doesn’t exist. I am sure Valteron would have found this funny.
You could have started with this.
Oh…Valteron…with a V! Hell. I thought you typed Walteron.
Sure, I suppose you’re asking for it, but then again, you know where you’re going in the end, right? And it’s your choice. You’re making your choices right now.
People usually know where they’re going - some go to heaven, some hell and others, to the country … with bears. 
Seems to me if you’re looking to get smote, you got to head over to some serious blasphemy. Piddling little gentlemens bet for small stakes, i.e., your puny existence…not exactly big time, is it? Looking to piss off God enough to get righteously smote, you’re gonna have to do better than that, I think.
And, heck, if I were God, I’d probably cream the guy next to you, so’s I could see the look on your face.
Does this count as wishing death on yourself and can you be warned/banned for that?
Perhaps God doesn’t find you interesting enough to pay attention to your rant.
I know I feel that way.
Tris
Arguably, that was Kronos. His grandson Apollo is in charge now.
As any Christian Sunday School student could tell you, “Thou shalt not put YHWH thy God to the test.”
I’ll need to ponder this.
I can see it in sort of a *Twilight Zone * mode.
Like this guy, he sets up a stunt/suicide, a cross between a Kervorkian and a Copperfield, he sets it up so that when he flips God off, he gets smote, but good. I dunno, maybe some lightning bolt out of the blue, thermonuclear spontaneous human combustion, gotta be impressive, gotta leave no doubt but that this dude has been smote!
And he gets up there and God asks: WTF? (Kinda feel sorry for God, never gets to say “Cite?”…but I digress…) Did it for you, Lord, says the shmuck, did it to revive faith amongst the faithless, lotta atheists had to go home and change their trousers, and their attitude, saved a lot of souls.
And God reaches for the Big Lever, the one that will open the trap door beneath the shmucks feet so he’s goes plummeting (“AAAiiieeeeeee!”) Coyote-like straight down to Hell.
“Still, never did much care for a smart-ass…” saith the Lord.
(Maybe the trick ending, the shmuck falls and falls, all the way to Hell, and doesn’t land on a lawyer. I dunno, is that stretching the credulity too far?)
And that’s a change from the way he was before? 
And you want a little “God didn’t kill me test!” to convince anyone?
I assume that, if there is a God, he knows human nature better than you and isn’t impressed by your internet complaints about how he missed this golden opportunity. If God had to take time out of his God days for everyone who said “Oh yeah? Well, if there is a God…” then he wouldn’t have any time left over for actual God stuff. You’re not so special.
The smugness is getting a bit deep here, IMHO. Life is a continuous stream of
A says “I don’t believe it!”
B says “Here is the evidence and/or proof.”
A says “Now I believe/don’t believe the evidence/proof.”
until you get to the concept of gods, then you get
A says “I don’t believe it!”
B says “All you have to do is believe it, then evidence will present itself.” or “You won’t need evidence!”
A says “???”
When you add in the “You’re not supposed to test any of God’s apparently limitless claims to power” factor, what you’ve got is an imbalance-the greatest claim possible backed up not by any direct evidence, but by feelings and the spottiest history imaginable. If I buy an mp3 player, I tend to buy a name brand with a decent return policy. If I buy a car(a bigger investment), I do deeper research via something like Carfax to see it’s history, and check the dealer out. If I buy a house(an even bigger investment), I’ll pay big buck to make sure everything is on the up-and-up. Why, when it comes to the biggest investment of all-my life, should I do things bass-ackward, not test the system to see if the claims made can be backed up, and rely on the most unreliable system of all-blind faith?
"If God had to take time out of his God days for everyone who said “Oh yeah? Well, if there is a God…” then he wouldn’t have any time left over for actual God stuff. "? Does your concept of God not include omnipotence?
Which is the bigger assumption-that God would accept a test, or that there is a God in the first place?
My concept of God includes a being who knows a tongue-in-cheek comment when he sees one.
You, sir, are not God.
As for the assumption angle, I’m not attempting to prove that there is a God. I am, however, saying that my “concept of God” would include a being who knows human nature better than Valteron does.
Back to my first comment, people saying “If there is a God…” and then throwing in some sort of test are a dime a dozen. Biblically speaking, God doesn’t have much reason to reveal himself to Valteron because God already has via the scriptures. If Valteron feels that revelation wasn’t good enough, that’s his choice but he’s not entitled to extra revelation just because he wants to start making up tests. God might decide to give someone an extra something (i.e. Paul) but that’s on God’s terms, not Valteron’s.
Sure, it’s a Catch-22. That’s religion for ya. Valteron asked why his failure to die signified – to the devout, it signifies nothing for the reasons noted above. To Valteron, I’m sure it signifies the lack of a God.