XPost: alt.atheism, alt.agnosticism, sci.skeptic   
   XPost: alt.christnet   
      
   On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 18:37:36 +1000, Sylvia Else    
   wrote:   
   .   
   >On 19/09/2014 7:21 AM, mur@.not. wrote:   
   >> On Mon, 15 Sep 2014 19:54:14 +1000, Sylvia Else    
   >> wrote:   
   >> .   
   >>> On 14/09/2014 1:57 AM, mur@.not. wrote:   
   >>>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2014 23:14:54 -0400, Olrik  wrote:   
   >>>> .   
   >>>>> Le 2014-09-10 14:47, mur@.not. a écrit :   
   >>>>>>        Would they be able to post at all?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> What lies?   
   >>>>   
   >>>>       All of them. Of course the biggest is that there's no evidence for   
   God's   
   >>>> existence, when if there really was no evidence there would be nothing for   
   >>>> anyone to believe in.   
   >>>   
   >>> The alternative possibility is that people believe despite the absence   
   >>> of evidence.   
   >>>   
   >>> As an argument for the existence of God, it really doesn't work. It just   
   >>> leaves open the question of why people believe.   
   >>   
   >>      If there really was no evidence there would be nothing for them to   
   believe.   
   >   
   >If you believe that, I'm forced to ask you what the evidence is for it?   
   >   
   >Generally, all that's required is to conceive of something to believe,   
   >and then believe it. Evidence is an optional extra.   
      
       How do you imagine it happened then? Since none of you can explain what   
   sort   
   of evidence you think there should be, or where it should be, or why it should   
   be there if God exists, try explaining how the evidence you say doesn't exist   
   came to be in the first place. Try explaining in detail how you think the books   
   of the Bible came into existence from the very start, and why they did. Then go   
   on to explain how the supposed lies were kept going and most importantly how   
   billions of people were persuaded to believe the supposed lies. Don't just say   
   some lame copout infantile mindless crap like you did above, but try explaining   
   IN DETAIL something that's at least some little bit respectable so there   
   actually is something to consider. We know you people have no clue about what   
   evidence you think should exist. Let's see if you are any less clueless about   
   how the evidence you claim doesn't exist actually came to exist.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)