XPost: alt.atheism, alt.agnosticism, sci.skeptic   
   XPost: alt.christnet   
      
   On Sat, 04 Oct 2014 13:52:04 +1000, felix_unger  wrote:   
      
   >On 29-September-2014 11:04 AM, mur@.not. wrote:   
   >> On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 20:53:54 -0500, Mitchell Holman  wrote:   
   >> ..   
   >>> mur@.not. wrote in news:p5692a51l3q7udvc0ism4ou8r8td1s1cbo@4ax.com:   
   >>>   
   >>>> 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.   
   >>>   
   >>>     Huh?   
   >>>   
   >>>     What does it matter how many people believe something?   
   >>      Because there has to be reason for them to believe it. That's a   
   starting   
   >> line for you to try to get as "far" as. What if you ever could get as far   
   as the   
   >> starting line? I wonder....LOL...I have to wonder because none of you have   
   >> gotten that "far" yet...LOL... You people are hilarious!!!!   
   >   
   >and the more ppl who believe something, the greater the likelihood they   
   >have good reason to do so, and the greater the possibility that the   
   >belief is true   
      
       That's one of the many easy starting lines these morons can't get as "far"   
   as. To try to think of the possibility of God's existence and the possibility   
   of   
   something we know is bullshit's existence in the same way is so retardedly   
   stupid that I don't believe a normal person could do it, but these morons act   
   like they do it all the time. Harry Potter is one of the most childlike and   
   horrendously stupid examples, though certainly not the only example.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)