XPost: sac.politics, can.politics, alt.atheism
XPost: alt.politics.homosexuality
On Fri, 29 May 2015 21:08:56 -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 <
avid@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.
>
>Given that he allegedly resurrected the daughter of a "ruler"
Where?
>I'd expect
>documentation of an event of such political importance from the time
>period in question from multiple sources. Then there were the several
>occasions where he supposed miraculously fed thousands of people at a
>time.
Where do you think this documentation should be and how do you think it
should have been preserved all these years?
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
