[Colin2B]

your God-eating Colin doesn't exist.

Don’t bank on it, he just hasn’t revealed himself yet

[Kartazion (OP)]

So, the basis on which you say he doesn't exist, is the Google found him.

What Google finds is this thread with your impiety of this God eater story. And this thread says it doesn't exist 'cause you made up this story.

Don’t bank on it, he just hasn’t revealed himself yet

Revelation is surely not to surprise God but men. IOW God is already aware without one of his creatures revealing themselves to him.

[Bored chemist]

. And this thread says it doesn't exist 'cause you made up this story.

Have you not realised yet?
You are trying to push a story that is "made up" by bronze age goat herders.
The things about Colin, is that unless you can actually prove he doesn't exist then there is no God.
The fact that he's hypothetical does not change that.

[Kartazion (OP)]

Have you not realised yet?
You are trying to push a story that is "made up" by bronze age goat herders.

Even though the Bible and other texts would have been written by Bronze Age goat herders, well they are not talking about God eaters. Please give me a source on Colin and God ... on the claim you are fabricate.

[Bored chemist]

Please give me a source on Colin

Because I said so.
Now, either prove me wrong, or accept that God doesn't exist.

[Kartazion (OP)]

I'm proving you wrong because your story about Colin eating Gods doesn't exist.

[alancalverd]

Here's your story, translated from (or at least by) Ancient Hebrew to give it credence.

In the beginning was a butterfly who laid an egg that turned into a caterpillar that ate deities. It was a very hungry caterpillar [note "The Very Hungry Caterpillar" is a well-known and respected holey book for children] so he ate all the possible deities, then pupated, turned into a butterfly, and flew away.

The extraordinary thing about lepidoptera is that no recognisable anatomy persists from the caterpillar to the adult, therefore the nonexistence of Colin in the present does not preclude the possibility of his existence in the past.

[Bored chemist]

I'm proving you wrong because your story about Colin eating Gods doesn't exist.

That particualr fallacy is just "proof by assertion".
It won't work on a science page.
Try making your point like a grown-up rather than
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_the_stone

[Kartazion (OP)]

Here's your story, translated from (or at least by) Ancient Hebrew to give it credence.

You translated from a document that does not exist.

In the beginning was a butterfly who laid an egg that turned into a caterpillar that ate deities. It was a very hungry caterpillar [note "The Very Hungry Caterpillar" is a well-known and respected holey book for children] so he ate all the possible deities, then pupated, turned into a butterfly, and flew away.

You fabricate. You want us to believe that your caterpillar story has something to do with Colin eating God.

The extraordinary thing about lepidoptera is that no recognisable anatomy persists from the caterpillar to the adult, therefore the nonexistence of Colin in the present does not preclude the possibility of his existence in the past.

No source from the past speaks of an analogy of a caterpillar eating gods. More seriously Colin that is a caterpillar and eats gods was invented here in this thread. That it existed is possible, but currently unavailable.

That particualr fallacy is just "proof by assertion".
It won't work on a science page.
Try making your point like a grown-up rather than
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_the_stone

So you make up a story about some Colin who eats Gods, and I have to prove he doesn't exist? Since you invented it in an abstract form, wouldn't it be logical to say that it doesn't exist in real life? So Colin doesn't really exist; You only imagined him.

[alancalverd]

You translated from a document that does not exist.

Let's see your proof of the nonexistence of my source document, please.

[alancalverd]

No source from the past speaks of an analogy of a caterpillar eating gods.

I wrote my contribution 21 hours ago. That is a source from the past, and it is more credible than Genesis verse 21. 

[Kartazion (OP)]

Let's see your proof of the nonexistence of my source document, please.

That is a source from the past, ...

Can you give me the source of your past document? You can not... That's the proof.

..., and it is more credible than Genesis verse 21.

The Bible is the most read book in the world. Your story of Colin the caterpillar who eats Gods does not exist. Do you see where the difference in credibility is?

[Colin2B]

The Bible is the most read book in the world.

Books like Shakespeare, Sherlock Holmes, Agatha Christie etc are also widely translated and readaround the world, but popularity doesn’t make something true, neither does belief.

[alancalverd]

You could add Harry Potter, Mein Kampf,  Das Kapital, and the Thoughts of Chairman Mao to the list of best sellers. Unlike the Bible, they are mostly read from end to end, and frequently in the original language as approved by the author. Not sure any of them is less credible than the much-edited mish-mash of myth, propaganda and non-eyewitness history sold by door-to-door (or continent-to-continent) Christians.

[Bored chemist]

Your story of Colin the caterpillar who eats Gods does not exist.

It must exist because you are discussing it.
Truth is not a popularity contest.

[Bored chemist]

You translated from a document that does not exist.

How could that be possible?
It's clearly wrong, in this instance- but that's beside the point.
How could Alan translate something that doesn't exist?

[Bored chemist]

So you make up a story about some Colin who eats Gods, and I have to prove he doesn't exist?

Yes.
That's how logic works.
If Colin exists then God doesn't.
So the non-existence of Colin is a pre-requisite for your assertions that God exists.

That was true before I wrote about it.
The existence of a God requires- and always has required- the absence of Colin.

It doesn't matter that mankind may have taken millennia to realise this.
And, for what it's worth, I picked up the idea of Colin, from the 'net a wile ago.

So, if you want  to tell us that God exists, you need to start by proving that your god is,at least, possible.
And He's only possible if Colin doesn't exist.
So, yes, you need to prove Colin's absence.
Don't bother to come back unless you can show that.
Good luck

[Bored chemist]

Can you give me the source of your past document? You can not... That's the proof.

Proof of what?

[Kartazion (OP)]

How could Alan translate something that doesn't exist?

He invented a source that does not exist.

Proof of what?

The proof that the document you are talking about does not exist.

[alancalverd]

I translated it from a source I wrote earlier. You might quibble about whether an email is a document (legally it is) but you can't argue about time sequences.