Why do people deny or have various doubts about God?

[Sonofason]

Nonsence. Evidence is evidence whether you even understand it or not.

If that is true, than existence is evidence of God. But you don't have to understand that, just believe it.

 

[Sonofason]

SonofaSon,
It was not just the flood, it would the literal story of Noah, the flood, the Ark and the animal business. Do you really think that actually happened?

Yes, of course I do. But then I believe in the power of God to accomplish His will.

My point was that if we find events Jesus asserts as being true, that are proven to be not true, would that conclude that the bible or stories attributed to Jesus are fabrications? That they were nothing but fiction created by the Bronze Age men to explain the unknown world around them.

I see no reason to speculate. If you have evidence that Jesus' assertions are untrue, you should present it.

Hypothetically, would you agree that if the story of the flood was proven untrue would that debunk Jesus as any sort of credible person or divine entity?

I see no reason to speculate over such things. I already know that Jesus is a credible person and divine entity, so you have little hope of disproving that. But if you have evidence that Noah's flood never occurred, then I think you should present the evidence.

 

[Imaginary_Friends]

But if you have evidence that Noah's flood never occurred, then I think you should present the evidence.

Good sir....there isn't enough water...without even going any further...If you are really interested...

Global flood - RationalWiki

 

[Sonofason]

Good sir....there isn't enough water...without even going any further...If you are really interested...

Global flood - RationalWiki

Well under current conditions, you're right. But I believe you are going to have to prove that the conditions at the time of the flood were the same as they are today if you're actually interested in supporting this claim of yours.

 

[JerryL]

Well under current conditions, you're right. But I believe you are going to have to prove that the conditions at the time of the flood were the same as they are today if you're actually interested in supporting this claim of yours.

Which reverses the burden of proof.

You need to prove that the conditions however many years ago *were* conducive to a global flood. You have the positive claim (things were different then) and so require the support.

 

[Sonofason]

Which reverses the burden of proof.

You need to prove that the conditions however many years ago *were* conducive to a global flood. You have the positive claim (things were different then) and so require the support.

No I don't have to prove anything. You are the one making the claim that a flood never occurred. I personally don't know if one occurred. I believe there was a flood, but I don't have proof of that. You're telling me it never happened, and so therefore you ought to provide evidence for that claim.

 

[Sonofason]

Which reverses the burden of proof.

You need to prove that the conditions however many years ago *were* conducive to a global flood. You have the positive claim (things were different then) and so require the support.

Also, I never said the conditions were different. It was you who implied they were the same. And I want you to substantiate that claim.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Okay then, if you have evidence that there was no great flood covering the entire earth, now is the time to present it.

Round and round we go ...

 

[Sonofason]

Round and round we go ...

Nope - that is not evidence.

 

[JerryL]

No I don't have to prove anything. You are the one making the claim that a flood never occurred.

Actually: I've made no claim at all regarding the flood in this thread. I've merely claimed that you've improperly placed the burden of proof on the negative claim.

You can even see the give-away word that it's a negative claim above.

I similarly claim that you are not a Kriptonian with the power to fly. It's not upon me to prove you are not.

I personally don't know if one occurred. I believe there was a flood, but I don't have proof of that. You're telling me it never happened, and so therefore you ought to provide evidence for that claim.

That's not actually how proof works. One cannot prove the lack of something... especially when you start throwing in magic.

Also, I never said the conditions were different. It was you who implied they were the same. And I want you to substantiate that claim.

You implied it when you said "But I believe you are going to have to prove that the conditions at the time of the flood were the same as they are today "

One major problem with requiring that negatives be proven is that it becomes turtles all the way down. If we found an alien camcorder on the moon that had recorded Earth for the last 4 billion years you'd say I needed to prove that it wasn't planted by the devil with fake information.

By that standard: you can't even prove you actually exist.

 

[Imaginary_Friends]

Well under current conditions, you're right. But I believe you are going to have to prove that the conditions at the time of the flood were the same as they are today if you're actually interested in supporting this claim of yours.

OK. Its just not the conditions then, it's the results now. A global flood a few thousand years ago would be a mass extinction event which would prohibit the abundance of life present today. I realized the fallacy of trying to convey my point to you via text so please watch this video,

 

[The Hammer]

Good sir....there isn't enough water...without even going any further...If you are really interested...

Global flood - RationalWiki

I already tried explaining all that to Sonofason. He is well versed in Apologetics. This argument with him is about as useful as running headlong into a wall. He will not see reason, and will either deny the evidence presented before him, or flip the burden of proof, or bounce into special pleading fallacies.

 

[The Hammer]

No I don't have to prove anything. You are the one making the claim that a flood never occurred. I personally don't know if one occurred. I believe there was a flood, but I don't have proof of that. You're telling me it never happened, and so therefore you ought to provide evidence for that claim.

How about we flip the burden of proof then? If you say that we cannot prove that the flood did not happen (despite all the evidence handed to you), then please enlighten the forums, logically, on why it did happen.

 

[Bunyip]

If that is true, than existence is evidence of God. But you don't have to understand that, just believe it.

No offence mate, but you act in a way that would make me a fool if I took your word for that.

 

[Imaginary_Friends]

I already tried explaining all that to Sonofason. He is well versed in Apologetics. This argument with him is about as useful as running headlong into a wall. He will not see reason, and will either deny the evidence presented before him, or flip the burden of proof, or bounce into special pleading fallacies.

I know, I know. Its not just the flood either. Even when SonofSon tried to tap dance when Jesus said the end times would happen in THIER generation he still neglects the whole theme of the new testament was the end is nigh, the second coming is at hand. Even Paul conveyed in Romans and Acts that, why bother getting married because the end is near. This is a reoccurring theme for cults. FEAR. Chicken little, the sky is falling. The End is near, best to stick with us if you wanna survive. This played out with the Waco Branch Davidian's. Fear and paranoia are keys signs of delusion.

 

[The Hammer]

I know, I know. Its not just the flood either. Even when SonofSon tried to tap dance when Jesus said the end times would happen in THIER generation he still neglects the whole theme of the new testament was the end is nigh, the second coming is at hand. Even Paul conveyed in Romans and Acts that, why bother getting married because the end is near. This is a reoccurring theme for cults. FEAR. Chicken little, the sky is falling. The End is near, best to stick with us if you wanna survive. This played out with the Waco Branch Davidian's. Fear and paranoia are keys signs of delusion.

Agreed, I am still waiting for his response. I want to see what evidence he will present (legitimately curious), or how he will dance around my questioning. It's entertaining even if, albeit, frustrating.

 

[Sonofason]

Actually: I've made no claim at all regarding the flood in this thread. I've merely claimed that you've improperly placed the burden of proof on the negative claim.

You can even see the give-away word that it's a negative claim above.

I similarly claim that you are not a Kriptonian with the power to fly. It's not upon me to prove you are not.


That's not actually how proof works. One cannot prove the lack of something... especially when you start throwing in magic.


You implied it when you said "But I believe you are going to have to prove that the conditions at the time of the flood were the same as they are today "

One major problem with requiring that negatives be proven is that it becomes turtles all the way down. If we found an alien camcorder on the moon that had recorded Earth for the last 4 billion years you'd say I needed to prove that it wasn't planted by the devil with fake information.

By that standard: you can't even prove you actually exist.

Since it has become very clear that you are incapable of supporting your claim that no flood has occurred, I will expect that you will discontinue making such claims.

I am happy to see that my beliefs shall never be invalidated. Have a good day.

 

[Sonofason]

No offence mate, but you act in a way that would make me a fool if I took your word for that.

Why is that? It's what you are asking me to do.

 

[Bunyip]

Why is that? It's what you are asking me to do.

What I am asking you to do is stop acting like a troll. Nobody could mistake you for an honest and genuine believer. This game you play pf asking for evidemce that you have no interest in and will reject anyway just makes you look like a fool. So then when you claim to be speaking god's truth nobody could believe that either.

 

[Cephus]

If that is true, than existence is evidence of God. But you don't have to understand that, just believe it.

Why isn't it evidence of space aliens or the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Just making a bald assertion with no evidence to back it up is ridiculous and laughable. Surely you can do better than that.