XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.atheism, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
   From: me@nothere.biz   
      
   On 19-November-2014 5:21 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:   
      
   > On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 22:22:42 +1100, the following appeared   
   > in sci.skeptic, posted by felix_unger :   
   >   
   >> On 17-November-2014 4:56 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:   
   >>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2014 10:41:33 +1100, the following appeared   
   >>> in sci.skeptic, posted by felix_unger :   
   >>>   
   >>>> On 16-November-2014 5:14 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:   
   >>>>> On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 10:29:45 +1100, the following appeared   
   >>>>> in sci.skeptic, posted by felix_unger :   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> On 15-November-2014 5:23 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 00:28:47 +1100, the following appeared   
   >>>>>>> in sci.skeptic, posted by felix_unger :   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> On 14-November-2014 11:30 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> On 7/11/2014 5:48 AM, mur.@.not. wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 11:09:41 +1100, felix_unger    
   wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> .   
   >>>>>>>>>>> On 05-November-2014 6:22 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/11/2014 5:36 PM, felix_unger wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 05-November-2014 10:30 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/11/2014 10:26 AM, felix_unger wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 05-November-2014 10:23 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/11/2014 8:39 AM, felix_unger wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ppl believe because of the evidence   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, we needn't concern ourselves about the fact that people   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We need only look at the evidence that causes them to believe.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What is that evidence?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in regards to what?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You said people believe because of the evidence.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> So in regards to whatever it is that the people believe.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure what you're on about. ppl believe what they do for a   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> reason. the reason for any belief will vary according to the   
   basis   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> for it.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> The reason most people believe in God is that their parents told   
   them   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> to when they had no intellectual defence. I was fortunate not to   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> suffer that kind of child abuse.   
   >>>>>>>>>>> and so it would follow then that the reason most people don't   
   >>>>>>>>>>> believe in God is that their parents told them not to when they   
   had no   
   >>>>>>>>>>> intellectual defence. IOW atheists raise atheists and religious   
   parents indoctrinate   
   >>>>>>>>>>> their children with their beliefs. but a strange thing about   
   children..   
   >>>>>>>>>>> they grow up to be adults who can think for themselves and make   
   their   
   >>>>>>>>>>> own decisions about what to believe or not. and of course many   
   children   
   >>>>>>>>>>> are not influenced about theism either way by responsible parents,   
   such   
   >>>>>>>>>>> as mine were, and adults make choices about what they believe   
   >>>>>>>>>>> regardless of childhood influences, or lack thereof.   
   >>>>>>>>>> There's also the aspect of the lying necessary to insist there is no   
   >>>>>>>>>> evidence. The fact is that ALL evidence suggests God does exist   
   since   
   >>>>>>>>>> there's NO   
   >>>>>>>>>> EVIDENCE he does not. That fact works against what atheists WANT TO   
   >>>>>>>>>> believe, and   
   >>>>>>>>>> claim to have put their own faith in even as they deny their faith.   
   >>>>>>>>>> So the   
   >>>>>>>>>> situation is that all evidence says God does exist yet atheists deny   
   >>>>>>>>>> there is   
   >>>>>>>>>> any, and atheists claim to believe what they say meaning they claim   
   >>>>>>>>>> to have   
   >>>>>>>>>> faith in their own belief while at the same time denying their own   
   >>>>>>>>>> faith. On top   
   >>>>>>>>>> of all that stupidity their demand for evidence PROVES they think   
   >>>>>>>>>> there should   
   >>>>>>>>>> be some proof of God's existence if he does exist yet they have not   
   the   
   >>>>>>>>>> slightest clue what they think it should be, where it should be or   
   >>>>>>>>>> why it should   
   >>>>>>>>>> be there. They are truly like morons in regards to this topic, yet   
   >>>>>>>>>> they like to   
   >>>>>>>>>> think of themselves as authorities and feel that their abosute   
   >>>>>>>>>> cluelessness is   
   >>>>>>>>>> somehow intelligent. As is often the case, just describing the   
   >>>>>>>>>> position they're   
   >>>>>>>>>> in is hilarious.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> My position is more along the lines that if God exists[*], then there   
   >>>>>>>>> is either objective evidence of that existence, or there's not.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> If there is objective evidence, I'd like to know what it is.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> If there's not, then, regardless of whether God actually exists, the   
   >>>>>>>>> question is why you'd believe that He does, given the absence of   
   >>>>>>>>> objective evidence.   
   >>>>>>>> do you accept that people may have/have had real experiences of God,   
   or   
   >>>>>>>> are empowered by faith to change their life?   
   >>>>>>> I don't know about Sylvia, but *I* accept that there are   
   >>>>>>> people who believe they have had such experiences, and that   
   >>>>>>> faith (defined as "belief without proof") can certainly be   
   >>>>>>> life-changing. Neither of these has anything to do with   
   >>>>>>> objective evidence.   
   >>>>>> but I didn't say ppl who 'believe they have had such experiences' I said   
   >>>>>> 'have had'.   
   >>>>> So they have objective evidence which shows that the   
   >>>>> experiences were real, and not simply something they believe   
   >>>>> happened? If not, how is such belief verified?   
   >>>> how could ppl prove they have had some experience of/from God?   
   >>> By having objective evidence that they did, perhaps?   
   >> such as? this is the question that mur keeps asking. what objective   
   >> evidence would you expect to see/have that someone has had an experience   
   >> of God?   
   > Mur won't provide objective evidence because he presumably   
   > has none, and tries to shift the burden of proof to his   
   > opponents; don't sink to mur's level. Objective evidence is   
   > simply evidence that any disinterested observer can observe.   
   > It's not up to anyone but the claimant to provide the   
   > evidence, and once the claimant has what he/she considers to   
   > be objective evidence it's up to him/her to present it. This   
   > is pretty basic.   
      
   but you're being unrealistic for the simple reason that there would be   
   no objective/physical evidence of a spiritual encounter. would you   
   expect the persons face to be glowing? or them to be floating off the   
   ground? but religious faith has changed ppls lives. that is objective   
   evidence, is it not?   
      
   >   But just as an example, anything which   
   > violates known physical laws *and* leaves indications which   
   > *cannot* have resulted from operation of those laws would be   
   > worth investigating on a scientific basis. But it's also   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)