Do You Hate God?

[thorman]

I don't hate him. I'm dissappointed...disenchanted...very impressed with storm's answer and very disgusted with my own.

 

[Storm]

Well, thank you. Welcome to the forum!

 

[Magic Man]

I don't hate him. I'm dissappointed...disenchanted...very impressed with storm's answer and very disgusted with my own.

Why are you disgusted with your own?

And welcome!

 

[thorman]

I've seen Him work. I've had times when I've felt very close to him and now to sense my dissapointment against storm's surety seems almost like throwing **** in His face

 

[kamal804]

people are enemy of their ignorances. our knowledge about God is too lettle and often wrong; a true conceptualise of him will melt avalanches of hatred, disappointed, disenchanted and the like then you feel swiming into unlimited space of love, the p of hoppiness and say see you never to negative points.

_____________________
It is fortunate for you to have only what suffices you then you will be sufficed with the least needs of this world. If you think it is not sufficient for you to have the minimum needs of this world then all the worldly pleasures will not suffice you.
kowthar.blogspot.com

 

[kamal804]

people are enemy of their ignorances. our knowledge about God is too lettle and often wrong; a true conceptualise of him will melt avalanches of hatred, disappointed, disenchanted and the like then you feel swiming into unlimited space of love, the p of hoppiness and say see you never to negative points.

_____________________
It is fortunate for you to have only what suffices you then you will be sufficed with the least needs of this world. If you think it is not sufficient for you to have the minimum needs of this world then all the worldly pleasures will not suffice you.
kowthar.blogspot

 

[crystalonyx]

I don't hate a myth, I do hate the suffering some god concepts have caused over the ages.

 

[BucephalusBB]

I do hate the suffering ..........over the ages.

Just curious, but why? and I didn't delete a part of the sentence for nothing..

 

[logician]

No reason to hate a myth.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

Prove he is a myth.

 

[mudge991]

Prove he is a myth.

Prove he isn't. The burden isn't on people that don't believe, as Christians are the ones stating "there is a god. and you need to do x,y,z, ect to get into heaven"
The rational folks would happy not to hear one more TV sweater and make-up challenged wife asking for money.

 

[Father Heathen]

Prove I'm not God. Better bow as a precaution, right? ;-)

 

[Don Penguinoini]

Prove he isn't. The burden isn't on people that don't believe, as Christians are the ones stating "there is a god. and you need to do x,y,z, ect to get into heaven"
The rational folks would happy not to hear one more TV sweater asking for money.

Why must the burden of proof be on me? Your claim has equal weight to mine, i asked first hterefore i deserve an answer. Im not a christian, first of all, and not everyone in the world is either.

 

[Storm]

Prove he isn't. The burden isn't on people that don't believe, as Christians are the ones stating "there is a god. and you need to do x,y,z, ect to get into heaven"

No, the burden of proof is on whoever makes positive claim.

 

[Magic Man]

No, the burden of proof is on whoever makes positive claim.

Generally that's true, but in this case, I disagree. It's just like me saying that I've seen a 10-foot-tall scaled guinea pig who can breath fire and fly. Do you automatically assume it's true? I doubt it. You wouldn't believe me unless I gave you some kind of proof, and since the claim is so outlandish, I'd have to give you some good proof.

Humans tend to be skeptics, which means that we assume something is false or doesn't exist until proven otherwise. It's like being innocent until proven guilty. As the defendant in a case, I have to do nothing, while the plaintiff has to do all of the proving. All I then have to do is poke holes in the argument.

 

[Storm]

Generally that's true, but in this case, I disagree. It's just like me saying that I've seen a 10-foot-tall scaled guinea pig who can breath fire and fly. Do you automatically assume it's true? I doubt it. You wouldn't believe me unless I gave you some kind of proof, and since the claim is so outlandish, I'd have to give you some good proof.

If you said that, you'd be making positive claim.

Humans tend to be skeptics, which means that we assume something is false or doesn't exist until proven otherwise. It's like being innocent until proven guilty. As the defendant in a case, I have to do nothing, while the plaintiff has to do all of the proving. All I then have to do is poke holes in the argument.

I disagree that we assume everything is false until proven true.

 

[Magic Man]

If you said that, you'd be making positive claim.

So are you saying that in that case, if you refute my claim, that you'd have the burden of proof, since you'd then be making the positive claim that that being doesn't exist?

And would you believe that I had seen such a thing if I told you I had?

 

[Storm]

So are you saying that in that case, if you refute my claim, that you'd have the burden of proof, since you'd then be making the positive claim that that being doesn't exist?

Where in the world did you get that idea?

And would you believe that I had seen such a thing if I told you I had?

Not unless you met the burden of proof.

 

[Magic Man]

Where in the world did you get that idea?


Not unless you met the burden of proof.

I assumed when you said "No" to mudge's claim that Christians had the burden of proof, that you thought the burden of proof could rest on atheists. Is that a false assumption?

Exactly my point.

 

[Storm]

I assumed when you said "No" to mudge's claim that Christians had the burden of proof, that you thought the burden of proof could rest on atheists. Is that a false assumption?

Exactly my point.

The burden of proof CAN rest on atheists, when they make positive claim.