XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.athiesm, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
      
   On Fri, 10 Oct 2014 16:35:36 -0500, Free Lunch  wrote:   
   .   
   >On Fri, 10 Oct 2014 11:43:09 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R. Dean"@gmail.com>   
   >wrote:   
   >   
   >>On 10/7/2014 12:04 AM, felix_unger wrote:   
   >>> On 07-October-2014 9:27 AM, R.Dean wrote:   
   >>>> On 9/28/2014 9:05 PM, mur@.not. wrote:   
   >>>>> On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:10:14 -0500, Free Lunch    
   >>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>> .   
   >>>>>> On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:34:35 -0400, mur@.not. 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   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>     No place(s) in the entire universe? Or just none associated   
   >>>>>>> with this planet   
   >>>>>>> or star system?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> There are zero gods that are supported by 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.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>> Science is materialist, thus limited and confined to natural   
   >>>> occurrence and natural entities made up of matter, thus the scientific   
   >>>> method has no capability to examine and study the unnatural; therefore   
   >>>> there can be no solid, empirical evidence for Deity, since Deity does   
   >>>> not consist of matter.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> atheists seem unable to appreciate the absurdity of asking for material   
   >>> evidence of what is non-material and rejecting any non-material evidence   
   >   
   >Yes, it is absurd to imply that non-material evidence exists.   
      
       You can't comprehend the evidence that does exist. Instead you lie and say   
   there is none, even though if that were true no one would believe God exists   
   instead of billions of people believing he does. You believe God doesn't exist   
   because you claim there is no evidence, meaning that you don't accept the   
   evidence that there is. If there truly were none then everyone would be like   
   you   
   and not believe God exists since there would be nothing for them TO believe. It   
   seems even an atheist should be able to comprehend that much, but no....   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)