Er, how is it impossible to prove its existence?
All they need to do is stump up some evidence. It's impossible with a priori logic, yes, but not with a posteriori. There currently isn't any evidence we've found to prove the existence of a supreme being, but that doesn't mean that there cannot be any.
( Bob Todd whee, Sat 5 Apr 2008, 15:29, archived)

hehe, posterior

( Gilgamesh gazed in wonder as Frampton came alive, Sat 5 Apr 2008, 15:31, archived)

You're confusing logic with fact.

( Master Of Turnips. Only gays and morons believe in ghosts., Sat 5 Apr 2008, 15:31, archived)

If you can't reasonably prove a theory a priori, it's a very shaky theory.

( The Mock TurtIe ™ --- Thinks you are a cunt, on, Sat 5 Apr 2008, 15:32, archived)

I must be confused.
Surely you need evidence to prove a theory, and evidence is necessarily a posteriori?
( Bob Todd whee, Sat 5 Apr 2008, 15:35, archived)

But god implies sin
Innocent until proven guilty, I say. He doesn't exist until proof is found.
(0800221155 Coldseal windows, Sat 5 Apr 2008, 15:34, archived)