"Unfortunately, beating around the bush is all this guy will ever do."

Vinegar versus honey.

[QUOTE=only_human;390246]What, pray tell, is the right question?[/QUOTE]

Be ready. Ask, in your words: is there a God?

The right question to ask is when the f*ck are you going to give us your proof?

I used to have this bumper sticker on my work lunch box.

[QUOTE=davar55;390306]Be ready. Ask, in your words: is there a God?[/QUOTE]O venerable sage, I fain partake of thy wisdom lest I suffer the forfeit of ineffable ignorance. Be there a being so puissant that it lies beyond the yondest ken?

[QUOTE=only_human;390314]O venerable sage, I fain partake of thy wisdom lest I suffer the forfeit of ineffable ignorance. Be there a being so puissant that it lies beyond the yondest ken?[/QUOTE]

I am a bit confused about your meanings above. First, my experience with "fain" (combined with "would") is an expression of desire:[INDENT]"For I'm weary wi' hunting and I fain would lie doon."
[/INDENT]As to piss-ant beings, the world is full of them. One does not need to seek so far.

[QUOTE=kladner;390359]I am a bit confused about your meanings above. First, my experience with "fain" (combined with "would") is an expression of desire:[INDENT]"For I'm weary wi' hunting and I fain would lie doon."
[/INDENT][/quote]
I think fain could be used as an adverb of partake but am not really sure; it sounded good to my ear but prepending "would" sounds like an improvement in a humble request. Forfeit is the biggest error; surfeit would have been better but the sentence needs more work. He did say [I][B]my[/B][/I] words so I tried to come up with something. I thought bereft and beneficent sounded good too but I decided to just stop fussing with it.
[quote]As to piss-ant beings, the world is full of them. One does not need to seek so far.[/QUOTE]
Cute; it puts me in mind of an expression that I can't quite remember about someone not being notable in their native environs. As for puissant for powerful, that was in my humble effort to describe a god.

A British saying is "All talk and no trousers". I'll leave the readership to interpret that statement.

[QUOTE=only_human;390367]Cute; it puts me in mind of an expression that I can't quite remember about someone not being notable in their native environs. As for puissant for powerful, that was in my humble effort to describe a god.[/QUOTE]

Perhaps you are thinking of this:
[QUOTE="Jesus"]
Only in his home town and in his own house is a prophet without honour.
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=xilman;390372]A British saying is "All talk and no trousers". I'll leave the readership to interpret that statement.[/QUOTE]
A US one is "all hat, no cattle."
[QUOTE=Nick;390373]Perhaps you are thinking of this:[/QUOTE] Yes, that was it. Thanks

[QUOTE=only_human;390314]O venerable sage, I fain partake of thy wisdom lest I suffer the forfeit of ineffable ignorance. Be there a being so puissant that it lies beyond the yondest ken?[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=only_human;390367]I think fain could be used as an adverb of partake but am not really sure; it sounded good to my ear but prepending "would" sounds like an improvement in a humble request. Forfeit is the biggest error; surfeit would have been better but the sentence needs more work. He did say [I][B]my[/B][/I] words so I tried to come up with something. I thought bereft and beneficent sounded good too but I decided to just stop fussing with it.
Cute; it puts me in mind of an expression that I can't quite remember about someone not being notable in their native environs. As for puissant for powerful, that was in my humble effort to describe a god.[/QUOTE]

(Nice of you to dress it up.)

Is there a God? No. There is no God. How do we know this is a fact?
It has been proven, numerous times in then past 2500 years.

I posted the following on the internet not too long ago:

The fact that no one has ever proven that God exists is strong evidence that no god exists. Then there are the disproofs of the various so-called proofs of existence. Then there's the reasonable acknowledgment that the bible was humanly written. Then too there is the absence of any incontrovertible positive evidence of existence. And then there's a proof by challenge, where you challenge everyone and anyone to explain (briefly) why they believe, and when the result is nothing additional, one concludes there is no god.

That's the outline of my argument. I also posted a simple flowchart on this forum
which one is instructed to work through to complete this proof for themselves.
It's somewhere in Soapbox.