Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
And there is the long predicted equivocation folks, brought to you by the disingenuous use of the word faith.How is it such a bad thing that atheists are doing exactly the same thing as theists?
Turning to the atheist for justification could be an act of desperation since there is no justification for believing things for which there is no evidence. It's reasonable to dismiss without evidence that which is presented without evidence, believers and non believers do this all the time, except for believers when it comes to their religious beliefs. That's when they make the exception to be reasonable.And there is the long predicted equivocation folks, brought to you by the disingenuous use of the word faith.
The fact that this was pointed out to you several steps before you got to your conclusion, and that you still announced the predicted conclusion ignoring this glaring problem, is more than a little disappointing for those committed to intellectual honesty and truthful debate. Do you not see how disappointing such an argument is to others who have to sit by and watch while you slowly, painfully and excruciatingly try to hammer this fallacy into the discussion????
"That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."Turning to the atheist for justification could be an act of desperation since there is no justification for believing things for which there is no evidence. It's reasonable to dismiss without evidence that which is presented without evidence, believers and non believers do this all the time, except for believers when it comes to their religious beliefs. That's when they make the exception to be reasonable.
And there is the long predicted equivocation folks, brought to you by the disingenuous use of the word faith.
The fact that this was pointed out to you several steps before you got to your conclusion, and that you still announced the predicted conclusion ignoring this glaring problem, is more than a little disappointing for those committed to intellectual honesty and truthful debate. Do you not see how disappointing such an argument is to others who have to sit by and watch while you slowly, painfully and excruciatingly try to hammer this fallacy into the discussion????
why theists are so desperate to make us out to be like them is beyond me. i do not believe in things without evidence. If you can't tell the difference between not believing in something, because there is no evidence, and believing in something without evidence, you are a fool.
"That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."
Yes you do. You believe that there is no God. Or in your words, you don't believe there is a God (which is essentially the same thing, but anyway). And there is no evidence for that. Therefore, you do believe (or don't believe - same thing) something without proof.
If you want to prove that you are different, then feel free to present the evidence.
Non-belief is not a belief and lack of evidence against God does nothing to improve the possibility that there is a God.
Are Nihlists believing in something because they believe in nothing? No.
Non-theism is not the polar opposite of theism, it is the absence of theism and the abscence of belief. Just because there is no evidence for God doesn't make it a belief. Go back 20 years, if there was no evidence for anti-matter does that mean we only believed matter existed? No.
Belief in nothing is still a belief.
Since God is indistinguishable from nothing, you might have a point.Belief in nothing is still a belief.
Bald is a hair color.
Yes, it is, and not collecting stamps is a hobby.Bald is a hair color.
i don't know but the canucks are 6-0 in the preseason.
I don't know but the Canucks are 6-0 in the preseason.