Setting The Bible Reader Straight

[3rdAngel]

Yes, I did.

So if you do not believe in God and you are an Athiest how can you believe in the existence God?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am following a the conversation very well. Seems you are not though.

No, as I pointed out you are not reasoning rationally. In fact I can name the logical fallacy that you are making:

Hasty Generalization

 

[Subduction Zone]

So if you do not believe in God and you are an Athiest how can you believe in the existence God?

I don't believe in the existence of a god or gods.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Plus you are making a black and white fallacy.

 

[3rdAngel]

No, as I pointed out you are not reasoning rationally. In fact I can name the logical fallacy that you are making:

Hasty Generalization

I do not think this explains our conversation at all to be honest.

 

[3rdAngel]

I don't believe in the existence of a god or gods.

ZZzz yep and this is different to you saying that you do not believe in God earlier how?

 

[3rdAngel]

Plus you are making a black and white fallacy.

Yea not really. As I only posted you and what you said.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I do not think this explains our conversation at all to be honest.

I know. And that is why I added the fact that you are also clearly making a Black and White fallacy. It may have been a hasty generalization that led you to your black and white fallacy:

The "Either/Or" or "Black-and-White" Fallacy - Mr. Spagnolo's Neighborhood

 

[Subduction Zone]

ZZzz yep and this is different to you saying that you do not believe in God earlier how?

It is more accurate since it is a bit more inclusive.

 

[3rdAngel]

I know. And that is why I added the fact that you are also clearly making a Black and White fallacy. It may have been a hasty generalization that led you to your black and white fallacy:

The "Either/Or" or "Black-and-White" Fallacy - Mr. Spagnolo's Neighborhood

Once again not really. As I only posted you and what you said.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yea not really. As I only posted you and what you said.

You may not understand what a black and white fallacy is.

 

[3rdAngel]

It is more accurate since it is a bit more inclusive.

Sure but it was you that said you did not believe in God not me.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Once again not really. As I only posted you and what you said.

Yes, but probably due to prejudice you did not understand what I said.

 

[3rdAngel]

You may not understand what a black and white fallacy is.

All I see is you trying to deny what you wrote and clutching at straws to be honest.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sure but it was you that said you did not believe in God not me.

Right I do not believe in God. Or god. Do you believe in Allah? I don't. Is there a burden of proof upon you to prove that Allah does not exist? You might get this right.

 

[3rdAngel]

Yes, but probably due to prejudice you did not understand what I said.

Sure I understood what you said. You said you do not believe in God. They were your words. If you mean't something else you should have said so.

 

[Subduction Zone]

All I see is you trying to deny what you wrote and clutching at straws to be honest.

No, I have never been contradictory. Read up on the black and white fallacy.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sure I understood what you said. You said you do not believe in God. They were your words. If you mean't something else you should have said so.

The meaning is clear. You insist on misinterpreting them.

 

[3rdAngel]

Right I do not believe in God. Or god. Do you believe in Allah? I don't. Is there a burden of proof upon you to prove that Allah does not exist? You might get this right.

There is no burden on me to prove anything. I am not the one saying there is no God and coming to a religious forum with no proof for my claims.

 

[3rdAngel]

No, I have never been contradictory. Read up on the black and white fallacy.

Sure you have. You said you do not believe in God. They are your words not mine. Now your trying to change your definition after the fact.