XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.athiesm, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
      
   On Wed, 10 Sep 2014 17:55:17 -0500, Free Lunch  wrote:   
   .   
   >On Wed, 10 Sep 2014 14:47:21 -0400, mur@.not. wrote:   
   >   
   >>On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 14:35:42 -0500, Free Lunch  wrote:   
   >>.   
   >>>On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 14:44:14 -0400, mur@.not. wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 09:16:47 -0500, Free Lunch    
   wrote:   
   >>>>.   
   >>>>>On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 18:27:00 -0600, Uergil  wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>In article , mur@.not.   
   >>>>>>wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Most that I've encountered try to claim they have no belief. Not   
   believing   
   >>>>>>> any gods exist can mean having no belief, or it could mean believing   
   no gods   
   >>>>>>> exist. Even after making it clear they believe no gods exist many   
   atheists   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>Most atheists only SUSPECT that no gods exist, but are not certain   
   >>>>>>because they cannot absolutely prove it.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Those who claim otherwise have no idea what atheists are like!   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>Atheists do not believe in any gods. Suspect is a meaningless word in   
   >>>>>this context. Theists know they cannot support their belief in their   
   >>>>>gods with evidence.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>    Try to explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be",   
   WHERE you   
   >>>>think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit   
   for him   
   >>>>to provide us with it if he exists.   
   >>>   
   >>>Until you define your god, you cannot possibly determine what evidence   
   >>>you should be able to provide.   
   >>   
   >>    Since you feel there should be evidence for it you define it and then   
   try to   
   >>explain WHAT sort of evidence you think there "should be", WHERE you   
   >>think it "should be", and WHY you think it "should be" to God's benefit for   
   him   
   >>to provide us with it if he exists. Why are such basic things so impossible   
   for   
   >>you people?   
   >   
   >I'm not the one who invented any gods. I don't have any responsibility   
   >for the problems that theists have defending their religious dogma. When   
   >you find some evidence to support a god, let us know.   
      
       People have provided you with evidence and you lie about that because you   
   don't happen to like it. Then when challenged on what sort of evidence you   
   think   
   there should be you have no idea at all. LOL...as is often the case, you   
   people's position is hilarious!   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)