Evidence

[Subduction Zone]

If you think I believe those stories think again.

Your post seemed to indicate that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

F1fan said: This is why critical thinkers rely on the highest standard used in science, law, logic, etc.

No, of course the Messengers don't present the same kind of evidence that is used in science and law.
Try to think about why that is not the case.

I've got it!! But you will probably not like the answer.

 

[Truthseeker]

Look at this thread. I just posted post #1900, and all people have been doing is arguing about what is and is not evidence for God. It is only a battle of egos.

A battle of egos is what we want to avoid. At least I do.

 

[Truthseeker]

If it appeals to you and works for you that is fine. No one is saying that you should quit believing. It is just rather annoying when someone claims to have reliable evidence and obviously does not.

And no, this is not about egos. Unless yours is harmed when it is pointed out that you are following a concept that is not well supported and at times is self contradictory.

You yourself have a big ego, and don't even realize it, unless you are being disingenious. You love to argue, and that evidence of ego for me.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You yourself have a big ego, and don't even realize it, unless you are being disingenious. You love to argue, and that evidence of ego for me.

Or I could be merely earnestly looking for true concepts. Both of you now are making personal attack when none were made against you. That says a lot about your ego as well.

 

[We Never Know]

Good luck finding that kind of evidence for the existence of God. Please let me know when you find it.

I am not going to name names or get into a debate about this.
I will only say that I think it is illogical and unreasonable to expect to have evidence for God when that evidence does not exist.

The logical thing to do, when presented with evidence that believers offer, is not to say "that's not evidence."
The logical thing to say is " that evidence you offered is not good enough to compel me to believe."
At that point there is nothing more that needs to be said. The party is over and we can all go home.

Look at this thread. I just posted post #1900, and all people have been doing is arguing about what is and is not evidence for God. It is only a battle of egos.

"Look at this thread. I just posted post #1900, and all people have been doing is arguing about what is and is not evidence for God. It is only a battle of egos"

I agree being a god can neither be proven or disproven.

IMO what's funny is a person will ask for evidence for a god. The other person will state some personal experience(for examlpe) or something else. The person that asked will generally say "that can't be proven and isn't scientific evidence".

Science doesn't study a god or gods so no scientific evidence for that exists

 

[John53]

You yourself have a big ego, and don't even realize it, unless you are being disingenious. You love to argue, and that evidence of ego for me.

What is standing on the sideline and running on to stick the boot in every now and then evidence of?

 

[Truthseeker]

Or I could be merely earnestly looking for true concepts. Both of you now are making personal attack when none were made against you. That says a lot about your ego as well.

I don't think I'm arguing, but I could be wrong. I don't know what your condition is. But you seem a certain way.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

You yourself have a big ego, and don't even realize it, unless you are being disingenious. You love to argue, and that evidence of ego for me.

Using that logic, anyone with a lot of posts in this thread would have a big ego, amirite?

 

[Truthseeker]

What is standing on the sideline and running on to stick the boot in every now and then evidence of?

i don't want to get involved in arguments about evidence, but hoping against hope people would end arguing already and end this thread. Never mind, it is hopeless. It is stupid of me to from time to time try to stop arguing forever here when everybody should have made their points by now. This is post number 1929. This is ridiculous.

 

[Truthseeker]

Using that logic, anyone with a lot of posts in this thread would have a big ego, amirite?

Yes, probably. When there are endless posts on the same subject that is at least pointless.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Yes, probably. When there are endless posts on the same subject that is at least pointless.

Statistically, the top poster in this thread is @Trailblazer with 273 posts. (There's a button to check Top Poster at the top of threads.)

I don't see her as having a big ego, though. But I do see the logic you used to accuse @Subduction Zone of such, as falling flat.

 

[John53]

i don't want to get involved in arguments about evidence, but hoping against hope people would end arguing already and end this thread. Never mind, it is hopeless. It is stupid of me to from time to time try to stop arguing forever here when everybody should have made their points by now. This is post number 1929. This is ridiculous.

How is insulting people a way of stopping arguments?

And I know I've pointed this out to you before. It's a debate forum! Don't look at it if debate offends you! Stick to the DIR's. Of course you won't see a lot of action but there won't be any disagreement. Better still hang about the jokes forums like I usually do.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't think I'm arguing, but I could be wrong. I don't know what your condition is. But you seem a certain way.

As do you. It was amazing how quickly you contradicted yourself.

 

[Trailblazer]

Your post seemed to indicate that.

Just because I believe that Jesus was a Manifestation of God does not mean I believe all the stories that men wrote about Jesus. What Jesus purportedly did in those stories are not what made Jesus a Manifestation of God.

 

[Trailblazer]

I've got it!! But you will probably not like the answer.

Why don't you give me the answer anyway? How do you know I won't like it?
If the answer is "because God does not exist" then you are up against it having to explain why, if God did exist, the evidence for God would be the same as the evidence we have in science and law.

 

[Trailblazer]

A battle of egos is what we want to avoid. At least I do.

You can avoid that battle if you refuse to enter your ego into the battle. Let the other side enter their ego, they only show themselves up for what they are when they do that - arrogant.

 

[Trailblazer]

Science doesn't study a god or gods so no scientific evidence for that exists

Truer words were never spoken.
Atheists call themselves logical but most of them can't even figure that out.

 

[John53]

Sometimes the irony is so thick you can taste it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

"Look at this thread. I just posted post #1900, and all people have been doing is arguing about what is and is not evidence for God. It is only a battle of egos"

I agree being a god can neither be proven or disproven.

IMO what's funny is a person will ask for evidence for a god. The other person will state some personal experience(for examlpe) or something else. The person that asked will generally say "that can't be proven and isn't scientific evidence".

Science doesn't study a god or gods so no scientific evidence for that exists

The only reason that anyone is asking for evidence is because the OP and sometimes others, there is a bit of inconsistency there, keep claiming that they have evidence for God..

Why aren't you blaming the right people?