XPost: alt.atheism
From: olrik666@gmail.com
Le 2015-05-29 20:46, mur a écrit :
> On Fri, 08 May 2015 22:03:14 -0600, David Johnston wrote:
> .
>> On Fri, 22 May 2015 12:03:38 -0400, mur wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 08 May 2015 22:03:14 -0600, David Johnston wrote:
>>> .
>>>> On 5/8/2015 8:03 PM, mur wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 21:11:05 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> .
>>>>>> In article , mur wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 15:45:06 -0500, duke wrote:
>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 17:58:32 -0600, David Johnston
wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 4/18/2015 7:24 AM, duke wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Apr 2015 19:07:02 -0600, David Johnston
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/2015 2:14 PM, duke wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 09 Apr 2015 14:32:02 -0600, David Johnston
David@block.net>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/9/2015 5:28 AM, duke wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Too much hair splitting. Evidence exists for the presence of
God -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it can't be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> denied. One may not like it, but none the less, it stares them
in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the face,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hence:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An atheist denies
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see that you regard consistency as too much trouble to bother
with.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> You see wrong. I'm highly consistent.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Either it can't be denied, or atheists deny it. Pick one.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The item that nails the supposed atheist is that he rejects
evidence we
>>>>>>>>>> see.
>>>>>>>>> Yeah. I've seen a bible too. But Harry Potter was a more fun read.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But not any truth at all. Unless you think you can ride a broom
stick.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> These people can't distinguish between things we know are
fiction and
>>>>>>> things
>>>>>>> no one could know are fiction.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let's have examples of "things no one could know are fiction". 3-5
>>>>>> examples would be a good start.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any of the miracles Jesus was said to have performed, including
rising from
>>>>> the dead, etc.
>>>>
>>>> What evidence do we see of that?
>>>
>>> Other than what we have, what else do you like to think there should
be, or
>>> even could be? So far no one has been able to make any respectable attempt
to
>>> answer that question, meaning that those who demand it not only have no
reason
>>> to believe any should be available, but they can't even imagine what it
could
>>> possibly be, or where, or why it should be available. Jeanne Douglas is a
great
>>> example in a bunch of clueless individuals. She's convinced that if God
exists
>>> there should be some sort of verifiable evidence of it. She has no idea
what it
>>> should be, where it should be, why it should be available, or when she
thinks
>>> God should or should have made it available, but still she thinks it
should be
>>> available if God exists. She did make one extremely naive and completely
>>> unrespectable claim that God should re-grow limbs on amputees immediately
>>> whenever they ask him to if he exists, but that's the "best" she could
come up
>>> with. It's also the "best" these people as a group could come up with, and
their
>>> "best" can't be considered a respectable explanation at all. None of them
have
>>> the slightest clue what they think they're trying to talk about when they
demand
>>> evidence.
>>
>> What evidence do we see of that?
>
> When I challenge them to explain what evidence they think there should
be,
> where they think it should be, why they think it should be available, and
when
> they think God should or should have made it available if he exists, they
> consistently reveal the fact that they don't have the slightest clue what
they
> think they're trying to talk about. Every time!
Translation: «When I ask them to tell me they do think like me, they say
"no"!»
Every time! The NERVE!
--
Olrik
aa #1981
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
