XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.atheism, alt.talk.creationism
XPost: sci.skeptic
On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 09:39:53 +1100, felix_unger wrote:
.
>On 13-November-2014 8:13 AM, Chicken Runz wrote:
>
>> "Ralph" skrev i meddelelsen
>> news:PeqdnUTIspqeNP_JnZ2dnUVZ5gGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>
>> (snip)
>>
>>> It is to you. In real life....not so much.
>>
>> In a nutshell: If somebody believes in the existence of X, then that
>> belief in itself is evidence of the existence of X, according to
>> felix_unger. The argument is that nobody would believe in anything if
>> there was no evidence. And when billions believe in various gods, then
>> that is very strong evidence. I took it one step further and claimed
>> that my belief, that gods do not exist, therefor must be evidence for
>> the non-existence of gods. Seems pretty straight foreward, don't you
>> think? But apparently I'm the stupid one, with no common sense.
>>
>
>actually you're the one who misrepresents what ppl say-
Yes and by referring to him as the lying scumbag (or whatever) that he is
was just pointing out one of his characteristics that he repeatedly displays
for
all of us who read his shit.
>as well as being
>the one with no common sense. if you had any common sense, you would use
>it. firstly, we have to consider ALL factors about anything to decide
>what the situation actually is.
There is no evidence of any atheist ever doing that. I challenge any and
ALL
OF THEM to try to provide evidence that any of them do, but no...
>belief CAN be evidence, as I will try to
>explain, but 99.9% of cases belief is because of what evidence exists.
That's a starting line they can't get as "far" as.
>In the case of Christianity, the religion we are most familiar with in
>the West, apart from Judaism, the beliefs are based on the bible and
>it's teaching, and specifically the teachings of Jesus, and what is
>written about Jesus. but we could then go on to say that the billions of
>christians are also evidence, because if you (a person) had not heard of
>the bible, or anything about Christianity, the fact that so many ppl
>believed something would be evidence that there is something to believe
>in.
Another starting line they can't get as "far" as.
>and when you take everything about Christianity into consideration..
>ie. the bible, the testimony of religious experiences, reports of
>miracles, various texts and books, etc., that is all evidence for the
>existence of the Christian God.
Another starting line they can't get as "far" as.
>likewise there is evidence for God (in
>general, if you like), life,
Another starting line they can't get as "far" as.
>the universe, is evidence along with the
>literally billions of ppl who believe in God in various ways.
Another starting line they can't get as "far" as.
>that is
>all just plain common sense. but you got one thing right. In my view the
>fact that atheists exist is also evidence for the non-existence of God,
May be, but their mental restrictions and blatant lies are much stronger
evidence of God's existence by being evidence of Satan's influence on human
minds.
>by using the same rationale, the presumption that there must be reasons
>to believe that. although mur would not agree with this view I think,
>and he might like to explain why.
They can't provide any reasons to put faith in that possibility being the
correct one. They have no evidence at all that there's no God associated with
Earth. And though they've proven that they think there should be some sort of
proof they like to refer to as "verifiable evidence" that God exists if there
is
one associated with Earth, not a single one of them has the slightest idea what
it should be, where it should be, or why it should be provided.
>other evidence for the non-existence
>of God would be unanswered prayers, if it is claimed that God ALWAYS
>answers prayer,
That's no evidence that God doesn't exist. It's evidence that sometimes the
answer is no. Unless parents refusing a child's request is evidence that they
don't exist. But I hope you're not being dragged down into the hilarious type
position we've laughed at these atheists for being in.
>and scientific discoveries that contradict religious teaching.
Not really. Some would need explanations as to how they work together, but
the concepts of evolution and creation are certainly not contradictions. Quite
the opposite in fact.
>more evidence still (in my view) is the fact that things that
>are said to have happened years ago and attributed to God do not happen
>today, like ppl being raised from the dead for example. so we have to
>weigh up ALL the evidence that we have to determine what the truth is.
>we cannot, as atheists do, dismiss testimony as worthless, or accounts
>of miracles, answered prayers, whatever, or simply claim it isn't
>evidence.
Another starting line they can't get as "far" as.
>but the bottom line is it all comes down to what one chooses
>to believe. HTH.
They dishonestly deny their own faith, again making them evidence of
Satan's
influence. These things have been pointed out for them countless times.
Probably
nothing any human could point out for them would help them, but that doesn't
prevent it from being fun to point things out for them, and laugh at them,
anyway. Oh, yes, we're supposed to be gentle and nice and encouraging (and
probably not supposed to laugh at them), but what difference could it make
other
than just be less fun for us when we waste time pointing things out for these
people?
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
