XPost: alt.atheism, alt.agnosticism, sci.skeptic   
   XPost: alt.christnet   
   From: me@nothere.biz   
      
   On 08-July-2014 2:20 AM, BruceS wrote:   
   > On 07/06/2014 09:46 PM, felix_unger wrote:   
   >> On 07-July-2014 11:10 AM, BruceS wrote:   
   >>> On 07/06/2014 02:42 AM, felix_unger wrote:   
   >>>> On 06-July-2014 5:21 PM, BruceS wrote:   
   >>>>> On 07/04/2014 04:57 PM, felix_unger wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 04-July-2014 1:06 AM, BruceS wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On 07/02/2014 06:30 PM, felix_unger wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On 02-July-2014 8:40 AM, BruceS wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On 07/01/2014 12:36 PM, bilgat@m.nu wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> why are you not agnostic. you sound alot more agnostic than   
   >>>>>>>>>> atheist.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Agnostic holds the position that the existence of a god is   
   >>>>>>>>>> unknowable   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> There's the rub. Agnosticism holds that it's not possible to know   
   >>>>>>>>> whether gods exist. I don't buy that. I'm perfectly willing to   
   >>>>>>>>> accept   
   >>>>>>>>> the existence of gods, given objective evidence for their   
   >>>>>>>>> existence.   
   >>>>>>>>> Having not seen any such evidence, I remain without any belief in   
   >>>>>>>>> their existence.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> so lets talk about what you do believe then, to be consistent with   
   >>>>>>>> your   
   >>>>>>>> position of no evidence for God.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> To simplify, I believe I have never seen objective evidence for the   
   >>>>>>> existence of magical powers.  So, what specifically do *you*   
   >>>>>>> believe?   
   >>>>>>> Do you actually believe in one or more of the popular gods, and if   
   >>>>>>> so,   
   >>>>>>> why those and not all the others?   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> you believe then that NO prayer has   
   >>>>>>>> ever been answered or ever will be. you believe that NO person   
   >>>>>>>> ever   
   >>>>>>>> has   
   >>>>>>>> ever had any spiritual encounter or experience, or ever will. you   
   >>>>>>>> believe there's NO evidence that Jesus ever existed, despite   
   >>>>>>>> what is   
   >>>>>>>> written in the bible. you believe that NO story in the bible,   
   >>>>>>>> or any   
   >>>>>>>> other holy book, is true or really happened. you believe that NO   
   >>>>>>>> prophecy has ever been or ever will be fulfilled. you believe   
   >>>>>>>> there is   
   >>>>>>>> NO creator, and all life and existence must have some other   
   >>>>>>>> cause or   
   >>>>>>>> origin. you believe there is NO afterlife although you can't   
   >>>>>>>> prove it.   
   >>>>>>>> you believe that ALL the billions of ppl who believe in God are   
   >>>>>>>> deluded.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> You got some right, and missed on others.  That's about as   
   >>>>>>> accurate as   
   >>>>>>> a psychic reading, so I guess it's no surprise coming from a   
   >>>>>>> proponent   
   >>>>>>> of magic.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> and so on, and so on. Of course you can and will believe what you   
   >>>>>>>> like,   
   >>>>>>>> but I as I've said, I believe the claim that there's no evidence   
   >>>>>>>> for God   
   >>>>>>>> is just silly, and that it takes much more to credulity to   
   >>>>>>>> believe it   
   >>>>>>>> than to accept that there is evidence, because there clearly   
   >>>>>>>> is. the   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> And yet, every time you're asked for evidence of gods, you   
   >>>>>>> resort to   
   >>>>>>> evidence that some people *believe* in gods instead. It's been   
   >>>>>>> pointed out to you repeatedly that similar evidence exists to   
   >>>>>>> support   
   >>>>>>> beliefs in many different gods, some of which preclude others,   
   >>>>>>> so at   
   >>>>>>> least some of those beliefs are definitely wrong. None of those   
   >>>>>>> beliefs have (as far as I've seen) any better evidence to support   
   >>>>>>> them   
   >>>>>>> than the others, and none of them have any evidence better than the   
   >>>>>>> evidence that there people who believe there are no gods. How is it   
   >>>>>>> "silly" to just not accept any gods or other supernatural things   
   >>>>>>> without evidence that directly supports them?  Isn't it a lot more   
   >>>>>>> silly to believe in one (or one group) of particular gods, to the   
   >>>>>>> exclusion of the others?   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> more I see atheists wanting to deny there's any evidence for God,   
   >>>>>>>> the   
   >>>>>>>> more I'm convinced they're simply running scared from the   
   >>>>>>>> possibility   
   >>>>>>>> that any religious claims may be true. I've yet to see any atheist   
   >>>>>>>> come   
   >>>>>>>> out and say.. "yes, there's plenty of evidence for God, but I   
   >>>>>>>> simply   
   >>>>>>>> don't want to accept it"   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> There's plenty of evidence that people believe in gods, and have   
   >>>>>>> done   
   >>>>>>> so for a very long time.  I accept that, even though it's remotely   
   >>>>>>> possible it's all been faked somehow.  You still haven't presented   
   >>>>>>> even a shred of evidence that any one or more of these gods   
   >>>>>>> actually   
   >>>>>>> exist, outside the imaginations of the believers. Are you   
   >>>>>>> prepared to   
   >>>>>>> do that now?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> the only point I make, that I have ever tried to make, is that   
   >>>>>> there is   
   >>>>>> evidence for God. you can say it's just evidence that ppl believe in   
   >>>>>> God/gods if you wish, but that's not true. all of those things I   
   >>>>>> mentioned that you don't believe in are evidence for God, not just   
   >>>>>> evidence of belief. the bible stories about Jesus are evidence for   
   >>>>>> Jesus, not just what someone believes. any prayer that is claimed to   
   >>>>>> have been answered is evidence that prayer is answered, not just   
   >>>>>> that   
   >>>>>> ppl believe in answered prayer. every miracle that is said to have   
   >>>>>> happened is evidence for miracles, and not that ppl believe in   
   >>>>>> miracles.   
   >>>>>> all I'm talking about here is evidence, not proof.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> No, they just aren't.  These stories are evidence that people wrote   
   >>>>> the stories, and their popularity and the seriousness with which some   
   >>>>> people treat them is evidence that some people believe the   
   >>>>> stories. No   
   >>>>> story is evidence of its own truth.  And no, we're not looking for   
   >>>>> proof, just any actual evidence.  So the only point you make is   
   >>>>> completely wrong. That must be frustrating.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> It's not. because I know I'm right. you're in d'nile because you   
   >>>> want to   
   >>>> believe there is simply NO evidence for God, because you want to   
   >>>> believe   
   >>>> that God does not exist. no 'normal' person says there is no evidence   
   >>>> for God. only atheists do because they want to be atheists.   
   >>>   
   >>> No matter how many times I correct you about what I believe or want to   
   >>> believe, you misrepresent it.  This makes you either extraordinarily   
   >>> dense, or a liar.   
   >>   
   >> remind me   
   >   
   > It's literally right up there in this post, as part of the history.   
   > How hard is that?   
      
   "I'm perfectly willing to accept the existence of gods, given objective   
   evidence for their   
   existence. Having not seen any such evidence, I remain without any belief in   
   their existence"   
      
   so my saying that you WANT to believe there's no evidence is what you   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)