I agree with every word of that. However, on the other thread, where the post you quoted appeared, I had stated that the Constitution of the USA was not a document of divine origin, like the Ten Commandments were. I didn't think anyone would interpret that statement so literally that he would fail to realise that it was made sardonically.

However, I think the excuse that you can't prove a negative in this case isn't good enough, because, ultimately, you can't prove a positive either. I offered a Wikipedia article in response to your demand that I prove the divine origin of the Commandment: you challenge the authenticity of the source, the Bible, because no-one can prove it to be truly the Word of God. If Jesus spoke to you and said, Verily, I say unto you, obey, for they are my Father's orders, you would ask Him to prove it ... after all, even JC's paternity can be called into question. If He would deceive you about that, what other lies would He tell? Furthermore, if the Good Lord Himself came down to answer your questions, you would ignore Him and tell Him He doesn't exist, so His answers don't count.

Even if you deny everything, you don't prove anything and you don't prove nothing either.

Yes, it is highly improbable that the Ten Commandments really are the Word of God. But isn't the reality of existence itself so highly improbable that even divine interference seems no less unlikely?