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.
I tell people that God Is Not My Drug of Choice and I have a tee shirt that says so>
[EMAIL="robertlowe11@verizon.net"]robertlowe11@verizon.net[/EMAIL]
If someone applies this logic to their invisible wizard, then they have to apply that same logic to anything from Gandalf, Gimli, Ra, Thor and all the other claims they consider ridiculous and irrational because there's no evidence to support them. Do you feel the need to prove that the FSM doesn't exist in order to justify your disbelief in it. The burden of proof isn't on the reveiwer, it's on the person making the claim that something is true. God beleivers are making the assertion that a deity exists so they're the one's that have to give evidence in support of its existence. If I said that there was a pink invisible hare standing in the doorway, no one would believe me unless I gave empirical evidence that proved that there was a pink invisible hare standing in the doorway. It works the same with the God concept.
If someone applies this logic to their invisible wizard, then they have to apply that same logic to anything from Gandalf, Gimli, Ra, Thor and all the other claims they consider ridiculous and irrational because there's no evidence to support them. Do you feel the need to prove that the FSM doesn't exist in order to justify your disbelief in it. The burden of proof isn't on the reveiwer, it's on the person making the claim that something is true. God beleivers are making the assertion that a deity exists so they're the one's that have to give evidence in support of its existence. If I said that there was a pink invisible hare standing in the doorway, no one would believe me unless I gave empirical evidence that proved that there was a pink invisible hare standing in the doorway. It works the same with the God concept.
No. It's unprovable either way. There is no equation. There is no syllogistic logic. Neither of us have a scrap of empirical proof.
Oh you all sound soooo clever. But God calls you fools. "The Fool has said in his heart there is no God". Even the physics are saying that an atom is made up of much more than was previously thourght - that there could be alternative realities running alongside our own - and No, these scientist were not christians. They were not athiests either - at last they admitted they could not negate or discount God/a creator.
God is THERE. I feel his holy spirit within my soul....I did not before I was 'saved', 'saw the light' etc.....but a miracle happened when I asked Jesus to be my saviour and trusted him and decided to follow him. Suddenly, I knew God was there. You may never know this. It takes eyes of faith. My own human eyes couldn't see it. God had to open my eyes. You can pray and ask God to give you the proof of his existence that you need. But it is not just the physical reality that you see around you - a creation made by a creator - but a spiritual aspect that come from the almighty God from a spiritual dimension we do not know or understand. Like I said, the evidence is physically there, but the spritiual side does not come from us - but from God.
No. It's unprovable either way. There is no equation. There is no syllogistic logic. Neither of us have a scrap of empirical proof.
If a claim is immune to disproof that means that the plausibility of its truth is statistically unlikely so the most logical position would be disbelief.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jennaflorrie
Oh you all sound soooo clever. But God calls you fools. "The Fool has said in his heart there is no God". Even the physics are saying that an atom is made up of much more than was previously thourght - that there could be alternative realities running alongside our own - and No, these scientist were not christians. They were not athiests either - at last they admitted they could not negate or discount God/a creator.
'The Fool Hath said in his Heart I know everything.' Atoms are made up of mostly empty space. What physics is saying that an atom is made up than thought before. What empirical evidence is there for alternative realities running algside our own. Which scientists found this credible scientific information, assuming it's true. How did they perform their experiment. Did their research get into peer reviewed journals.
If a claim is immune to disproof that means that the plausibility of its truth is statistically unlikely so the most logical position would be disbelief.
There is basis either way. Sorry. You're tilting at windmills.
There is basis either way. Sorry. You're tilting at windmills.
If there's a basis either way when it comes to the god hypothesis, then there's a basis either way when it comes to the belief in gnomes and Tinkerbell. What rational basis is there even to support a god belief. There's no empirical evidence for it. Why don't believers apply that logic to anything else. If other claims are disregarded because they are unprovable and have no empirical evidence, then what's the difference between the other claims and 'god.'
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.
