XPost: alt.atheism, alt.agnosticism, sci.skeptic   
   XPost: alt.christnet   
      
   On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 14:25:01 +1100, felix_unger  wrote:   
   .   
   >On 09-October-2014 11:25 AM, mur.@.not. wrote:   
   >> On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 10:17:22 +1100, felix_unger  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 06-October-2014 9:53 AM, mur.@.not. wrote:   
   >>>> 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.   
   >>> amazing isn't it!   
   >>      It sure is, and evidence.....   
   >>   
   >>>>    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.   
   >>> and it's all because they want to cling to the one idea that God does   
   >>> not exist!..   
   >>      Yes, and deny it as they do so. They aren't fooling us, but do you   
   think any   
   >> of them are really stupid enough that they're somehow honestly fooling   
   >> themselves?   
   >   
   >I think because they keep telling themselves the same thing over and   
   >over, they eventually begin to believe it's a fact. like   
   >expensive_dinners 'no evidence' mantra :)   
      
       They first must want to believe the thing before they would begin trying to   
   get themselves to actually believe it. But then in contrast we've seen that the   
   majority of them are ashamed to admit they believe God doesn't exist. That   
   brings us to the question of whether more of them are ashamed to admit they   
   believe God doesn't exist than are ashamed to admit they believe there is no   
   evidence of his existence. Again describing their position is amusing, though   
   this particular aspect seems more pathetic than hillarious.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)