100% lack of evidence to God

[firedragon]

I'm asking you to support your claims.

You mean "Spoon-feed". No can do.

You providing evidence to back up the claims you made in the opening post is NOT irrelevant to the thread.

You were talking about another topic about all theistic arguments being logically fallacious. A completely different topic.

My point was that you don't even know if the slogan on his shirt has any relevance

Oh I do very well. But see, you got offended because I spelled his name wrong. I mean people spell the prophet Muhammeds name differently and I have never found that offensive. Maybe Aaron Ra is a divine person for you. Thats the level you are at. But you dont even know his epistemic positions.

Tell me his justification for "There is no God". Doesnt he fit the description of the atheist in the OP?

So you should do a little bit of exploring.

 

[Tiberius]

You mean "Spoon-feed". No can do.

Ha! I can see it now. Einstein writes, "Nothing can go faster than light." When the other scientists say, "We'd love to see your research that led you to this conclusion," he says, "Why? Figure it out for yourself, I'm not going to spoon feed you!"

You have no idea how to debate, do you?

You were talking about another topic about all theistic arguments being logically fallacious. A completely different topic.

I was not talking about that when I asked you to provide evidence to support the claim you made in the OP.

Oh I do very well. But see, you got offended because I spelled his name wrong. I mean people spell the prophet Muhammeds name differently and I have never found that offensive. Maybe Aaron Ra is a divine person for you. Thats the level you are at. But you dont even know his epistemic positions.

Tell me his justification for "There is no God". Doesnt he fit the description of the atheist in the OP?

So you should do a little bit of exploring.

Do you have any evidence that he is making the claim you specified in your OP? If he is not making such a claim, the justification for his lack of belief is irrelevant.

 

[firedragon]

Ha! I can see it now. Einstein writes, "Nothing can go faster than light." When the other scientists say, "We'd love to see your research that led you to this conclusion," he says, "Why? Figure it out for yourself, I'm not going to spoon feed you!"

You have no idea how to debate, do you?

Debate? Who is debating with you mate?

Do you have any evidence that he is making the claim you specified in your OP? If he is not making such a claim, the justification for his lack of belief is irrelevant.

Do some research. You will find.

 

[Tiberius]

Debate? Who is debating with you mate?

Certainly not you. You seem incapable of even having a discussion. So far, you're just acting like a troll.

Do some research. You will find.

I just did.

I could find NOTHING to suggest Aron Ra holds to the claim, The lack of evidence proves without a doubt that God does not exist."

Now, in your opening post, you said, "I have noted a few atheists make the claim that God does not exist because there is a 100% lack of evidence. Its a very famous atheistic apologetic shared by many."

Please support this claim. I will keep asking until you do so.

 

[firedragon]

Certainly not you. You seem incapable of even having a discussion. So far, you're just acting like a troll.

Ah. So I will say the same thing to you. You are trolling. A very few people enjoy it. And they think others are just like them. Trolls.

Please support this claim. I will keep asking until you do so.

Oh. Im so scared that you will use your keyboard weapon on an anonymous forum and assassinate me. Hilarious. Cheap.

Keep going.

 

[YoursTrue]

That was not the point of my comment. Can a person believe something to be true if they are not convinced by evidence? I say no. Can you choose to believe the earth is square (or cubed)? Here is evidence:

I've tried reasoning based on my own understanding but wouldn't you say that personal knowledge is limited?

Yes, but again -- this calls to mind that even Paul wasn't believed by many, although he had given his experience to some and it is recorded. What it also helps me to realize is that yes, we are limited, and obviously not all experiences are the same. Someone told me recently that her dead mother visits her in the form of a butterfly every day. Do I believe that her mother is somehow in that butterfly? No. Do I think that the woman is properly adding things up in the right way? (No.) But that's how she sizes the experience up. I hope to speak to her about what happens when we die.

 

[YoursTrue]

What in the world are you going on about? You're acting like one of those aliens in Star Trek who put Humanity to the test.

I was never a fan of Star Trek, but these aliens put humanity to the test? Hm, that's an interesting one. Humanity itself seems to put itself to the test. Every day and a lot. IMO.

 

[blü 2]

Thats irrelevant. If you are looking for a definition, you have to ask the atheist who is denying it. My personal definition is irrelevant.

It's the one you used in the OP so it's the ONLY one that's relevant.

Assuming you have one, of course ─ you're not acting like you have one, but I give you the benefit of the doubt.

What is that definition?

 

[firedragon]

It's the one you used in the OP so it's the ONLY one that's relevant.

False.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes.

That's why we should use methods for truth finding that involve others so that we may share expertise and also to get others to find any mistakes and errors we may have made.

Not saying no, but as I looked into this, let's take medication for example. Studies would show that they work for some, sometimes they are placebos and people respond positively and sometimes the medicines do not work at all or with negative side effects, even death is considered a possible "side effect" of a medicine that -- the doctor (supposedly an expert) prescribes.

 

[YoursTrue]

That was not the point of my comment. Can a person believe something to be true if they are not convinced by evidence? I say no. Can you choose to believe the earth is square (or cubed)? Here is evidence:

OK, but would you agree that sometimes the evidence is personal? If I am blind but I think I understand something, I might say, I see. And so it's possible that what I see is right, even if I were blind.

 

[Tiberius]

Ah. So I will say the same thing to you. You are trolling. A very few people enjoy it. And they think others are just like them. Trolls.

You think I am trolling because I am asking you to support your claims? Why don't you report me for trolling then and see what the staff here think?

Oh. Im so scared that you will use your keyboard weapon on an anonymous forum and assassinate me. Hilarious. Cheap.

Keep going.

In your opening post, you said, "I have noted a few atheists make the claim that God does not exist because there is a 100% lack of evidence. Its a very famous atheistic apologetic shared by many."

Please support this claim. I will keep asking until you do so.

 

[Tiberius]

Not saying no, but as I looked into this, let's take medication for example. Studies would show that they work for some, sometimes they are placebos and people respond positively and sometimes the medicines do not work at all or with negative side effects, even death is considered a possible "side effect" of a medicine that -- the doctor (supposedly an expert) prescribes.

Medicines are put through a great deal of testing. While there is an element of risk with any medical treatment, and such medicine that carries a high risk of serious injury or death is not going to be approved for use.

 

[blü 2]

False.

What, in your own thread about God, your own definition of "God" is somehow irrelevant? Wow, you're sounding like you're desperate.

Anyway, I'll take it that you don't know what you mean when you say "God" ─ since your conduct is completely consistent with that hypothesis ─ and leave you to it.

 

[firedragon]

You think I am trolling because I am asking you to support your claims? Why don't you report me for trolling then and see what the staff here think?

You called me a troll first mate. So why dont you report me as a troll? You should have taken your own advice.

In your opening post, you said, "I have noted a few atheists make the claim that God does not exist because there is a 100% lack of evidence. Its a very famous atheistic apologetic shared by many."

Lol. I told you many times to read through this very thread. But see, you want information to land on your lap like a king who calls his subjects. And then, you threaten people.

Do a bit of reading.

If you want some direct names of books maybe I can help you with a few. Read God delusion by Dawkins, end of faith by Harris, and Oppy. You will find a lot of information that supports the OP.

The thing is, you will not do the leg work. SO far, all you have done is troll and call me a troll.

 

[firedragon]

What, in your own thread about God, your own definition of "God" is somehow irrelevant?

Nah. See, you are making things up.

This thread is not "about God". It is about an atheists epistemic position and an argument. So my personal views about God is not necessary or relevant. I have said this already.

Try not to make things up.

 

[blü 2]

Nah. See, you are making things up.

This thread is not "about God". It is about an atheists epistemic position and an argument. So my personal views about God is not necessary or relevant. I have said this already.

Your personal view of what you meant when you typed "God" in your OP isn't relevant?

You jest, surely?

But never mind. We'll leave it where it's fallen.

 

[firedragon]

Your personal view of what you meant when you typed "God" in your OP isn't relevant?

Nope. Irrelevant.

 

[PureX]

I understand what he's saying because looking at it the other way, I must ask what convinces me there IS a God. And yes, I am convinced but it's a good question which is certainly worthy of discussion although some, not all, is personal referring to prayer and experience.

One of my major objections to religion is that it far too often ignores faith in favor of "belief". Which means ignoring and denying doubt in favor of a blind and quite irrational and dishonest pretense of one's own unquestioned righteousness. Where faith is a choice one makes in the face of one's own doubts and skepticism, "belief" is the rejection of choice and doubt in favor of pretending to have "knowledge" that one cannot actually possess. And in doing this, many religious expressions and institutions become antithetical to faith, and therefor to the spiritual quest of those it pretends to serve.

But this blind pretense that comes with "belief" is not exclusive to religion, or to theists. I see it all the time in atheists, as well. And the glaring example is in how many of them "believe" they have no choice but to presume their "evidence" (which is no evidence) to be inerrant and their opinions and conclusions about the truth and reality to be unassailably correct. So much so that they cannot tolerate ANY alternative evidence of interpretation to their own.

 

[KWED]

That's your opinion .. but you state it as a fact because you know that it cannot be proved by physical means i.e. scientific evidence.

I repeat, "There is no reason to accept the claim that gods exist". However, people can accept it if they want to.
Rational arguments and the evidence are all against the existence of gods, but people don't always make decisions based on evidence and rational arguments.

There is a lot more to life than science, you know.

Obviously.

That is not to say that logic and the scientific method don't have a part to play in determining truth .. it obviously does.

What other methods do you suggest we use to determine what it real or correct?