Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,928,903 times
Reputation: 4561
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Typical atheist mockery and goading. Your side won't even define what is acceptable evidence!! Too afraid you would be backed into a corner and have to admit God is real.
Jeff, you have a lot of nerve making a statement. I open up another thread which I gave you a link to, so to see if there's any common definition of evidence that can be discussed.
You choose not even to respond with what you felt evidence consisted of.
You're disingenuous and quite frankly not very Christian like in the way you treat honor. You spout off this kind of stuff when you had lots of opportunity to contribute constructively rather than hide your head in the sand.
I ask an honest question, and I also asked for an honest discussion. You instead keep making these type of comments.
Typical atheist mockery and goading. Your side won't even define what is acceptable evidence!! Too afraid you would be backed into a corner and have to admit God is real.
No jeff, here's the only argument for god I've ever really heard, simplified: 'Life exists, and most life seems to work at least fairly well, therefore life must have been created by god.' In other words, life exists, therefore god does. Without an observable or otherwise tangible definition of god the word means nothing.
While it can be argued that most life works at least fairly relative to it's ecological niche, only the most simple organsims -bacteria, insects, etc.- are evenly remotely close to perfection. All complex, slow-reproducing organisms have significant flaws because the more complex something is the more things can go wrong. Also, environments typically change more quickly than complex organisms can evolve, hence we humans are plagued by many 'design' flaws.
Typical atheist mockery and goading. Your side won't even define what is acceptable evidence!! Too afraid you would be backed into a corner and have to admit God is real.
What the...?
How on earth are we supposed to "define" what's acceptable evidence when we have no idea even what category that "evidence" is in, much less specifically what it's supposed to be???
We're all supposed to say "acceptable evidence is if you say X"? So...then...what would X be? We have no clue what you're even talking about as far as evidence. What the heck are we even supposed to be defining here...
You never had actual "evidence" and I think you're very surprised that anybody followed up on this, it sounded good to you at the time but now you have to backpedal like crazy and when backpedaling didn't work you resorted to turning and pointing the finger back at people YOU promised to produce the evidence to.
Why not just admit it so we can move on from here, for (no pun intended) heaven's sake.
OR if I'm 100% wrong on this, produce the evidence.
At this point in all this silliness, it's one or the other.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,928,903 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerZ
What the...?
How on earth are we supposed to "define" what's acceptable evidence when we have no idea even what category that "evidence" is in, much less specifically what it's supposed to be???
We're all supposed to say "acceptable evidence is if you say X"? So...then...what would X be? We have no clue what you're even talking about as far as evidence. What the heck are we even supposed to be defining here...
You never had actual "evidence" and I think you're very surprised that anybody followed up on this, it sounded good to you at the time but now you have to backpedal like crazy and when backpedaling didn't work you resorted to turning and pointing the finger back at people YOU promised to produce the evidence to.
Why not just admit it so we can move on from here, for (no pun intended) heaven's sake.
OR if I'm 100% wrong on this, produce the evidence.
At this point in all this silliness, it's one or the other.
Jeff won't even take part in the discussion thread of defining the word evidence.
Typical atheist mockery and goading. Your side won't even define what is acceptable evidence!! Too afraid you would be backed into a corner and have to admit God is real.
I, who you consider to be an atheist, have said I'd happily consider your world view more valid if you post evidence. As for how I define evidence, it's really just any sort of data or statistic that suggests a given thing consistently. If it can't be proven consistently, the evidence isn't very strong. It's not an unreasonable standard by any means.
So, I've expressed openness which is what you've been asking for; I'm curious why you haven't posted, or why you only posted on the people who you could come back with a 'mean atheists' comment. It's almost as if you're avoiding the problem. Don't make threats you can't back. It's a bad judge of character.
Jeff knows in his heart of hearts that what he considers proof is NOT what we consider proof. That is his problem. He is trying to get you to accept that what he considers proof is proof you would accept. It is a silly game and has no useful outcome. The issue of what constitutes evidence is discussed in another thread, but jeff will not agree with the conclusions in it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Typical atheist mockery and goading. Your side won't even define what is acceptable evidence!! Too afraid you would be backed into a corner and have to admit God is real.
You only respond to those who give you an excuse not to post. You know why you do that. You know your so-called proof is nothing of the kind. You are ashamed of it. You have been educated enough by others here to recognize that what you were taught to accept as proof is not.
How on earth are we supposed to "define" what's acceptable evidence when we have no idea even what category that "evidence" is in, much less specifically what it's supposed to be???
We're all supposed to say "acceptable evidence is if you say X"? So...then...what would X be? We have no clue what you're even talking about as far as evidence. What the heck are we even supposed to be defining here...
Yes that's exactly right. If the only thing that will convince you is God coming to you personally and shooting lightning bolts from his hands, then game over. I don't have evidence on that magnitude.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerZ
You never had actual "evidence" and I think you're very surprised that anybody followed up on this, it sounded good to you at the time but now you have to backpedal like crazy and when backpedaling didn't work you resorted to turning and pointing the finger back at people YOU promised to produce the evidence to.
And how do you know I don't have evidence? You don't, but thanks for demonstrating that you are another atheist who will put me on the defense with bold completely unfounded assumptions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerZ
Why not just admit it so we can move on from here, for (no pun intended) heaven's sake.
OR if I'm 100% wrong on this, produce the evidence.
At this point in all this silliness, it's one or the other.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,928,903 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Yes that's exactly right. If the only thing that will convince you is God coming to you personally and shooting lightning bolts from his hands, then game over. I don't have evidence on that magnitude.
And how do you know I don't have evidence? You don't, but thanks for demonstrating that you are another atheist who will put me on the defense with bold completely unfounded assumptions.
How about you move on?
Jeff why won't you address the legitimate question I ask of you?
In order for people to have an intelligent discussion, there has to be a common understanding of the words used. For that reason I opened the thread on how to define the word evidence, and gave you a link to it. You're understanding what gives evidence and my understanding may be different, and if its different we will NEVER get to any common ground. However if we can agree on what constitutes evidence, that will be a huge step forward in advancing the conversation.
So I ask you, Jeff, why will you not address that issue? There's nothing to lose, and neither you nor I will be wrong if we end up not agreeing on what constitutes evidence. If that is the case, there will be little that'd be gained by discussing that.
If on the other hand however we come to an agreement what constitutes evidence, future discussions can get advanced with that agreement.
So Jeff, why won't you take part in that discussion?
And how do you know I don't have evidence? You don't, but thanks for demonstrating that you are another atheist who will put me on the defense with bold completely unfounded assumptions.
You know, this is the type of comment you made to me earlier, which I believe also marked the last time you responded to me.
As another poster pointed out, most of your last posts have been responses to relatively easy things that also opened up a door for you to call out someone on being somehow rude. While frankly, I think there has been little rudeness. In fact, it's actually quite rude of you to boast about some amazing evidence then withhold it from everyone.
So, it is true, none of us know you have evidence. But here's the thing; multiple requests to see it have resulted in you not sharing it. Often, you change the subject like you do here. It starts off about the evidence but ends in you feeling offended. How can anyone logically deduce that you do have evidence when you've shown this much reluctance to show it?
For the record, I'm agnostic. You've lied about my faith. And your evidence (withholding the truth is a form of lying).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
