Who Is Lying Here, Christianity, Islam, or Judism? (believe, exist, Jesus)
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 don't think that monumentus' request is unreasonable at all. If so, then the request to prove the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster would be just as unreasonable.
There has been no request for and no claim to provide a PROOF for God's existence, Amazn. What has been requested and provided is scientific evidence and rationale SUPPORTING the existence of God as plausible, reasonable and consistent with existing scientific knowledge.
There has been no request for and no claim to provide a PROOF for God's existence, Amazn. What has been requested and provided is scientific evidence and rationale SUPPORTING the existence of God as plausible, reasonable and consistent with existing scientific knowledge.
The same can be said for the existence of the FSM.
Again it is nonsense because the onus is always on the person making a claim to back up that claim. Especially given this is a discussion and debate forum. Not a soap box or stage.
If someone espouses an opinion here I am well within my rights to ask them to back it up. If they will not or can not do so then that is fine with me. It would be nice if said people would just admit that though instead of engaging in the kind of cop outs we are seeing here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptsum
Again, it's not nonsense, its only nonsense because you don't understand or believe it. Each and every individual is entitled to their own beliefs without having to prove it to anyone else. It's not your fault if you don't want to believe it, the choice is yours just like I don't have to believe in what anyone else wants to believe. I have my own beliefs and I don't have to prove that anybody and as a Native American I doubt there are very few people here that are going to believe the same as I do and you'll find that is a common trait among Native Americans, we believe as we wish and no one questions it, it is our choice and that's why we do not debate religion. No, you do not have the right to question another person's belief you only have the right to question your own, not others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaznjohn
I don't think that monumentus' request is unreasonable at all. If so, then the request to prove the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster would be just as unreasonable.
Ptsum is absolutely correct. Mystic owes you zip, zero, nada evidence, certainly beyond what he has already presented. If this is not sufficient or satisfactory for you, well, so be it. It apparently is satisfactory for HIM, and it is HIS belief, isn't it?
This is not a court of law, there is no judgement rendered, no obligation is due. It is merely a place where people exchange thoughts and ideas - and very, very rarely does an opinion change from where it started. From either side, no matter what is discussed - religion, politics, or, that most holy of subjects, football!
If you really want to get in someone's face about their religious belief, go find a church on any Sunday, and start having conversations with the attendees. Challenge them to defend their beliefs. Tell them what you think. I'll be interested to hear the results. Should be quite easy for you if you are so confident they will be unable to successfully defend their position. Good luck!
Christianity is the only truly religion. It is the dominant religion in the western world, as well as the dominant religion in North America, South America, Europe, Central and Southern Africa, Oceania, parts of Asia. It is the world's largest religion by far.
Does a statement become true just because many people believe it is so?
Ptsum is absolutely correct. Mystic owes you zip, zero, nada evidence, certainly beyond what he has already presented. If this is not sufficient or satisfactory for you, well, so be it. It apparently is satisfactory for HIM, and it is HIS belief, isn't it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptsum
Again, it's not nonsense, its only nonsense because you don't understand or believe it. Each and every individual is entitled to their own beliefs without having to prove it to anyone else
It is a discussion and debate forum. So I repeat: If someone espouses a view here then I am perfectly entitled to ask them what the back up for that view is. If they can not or will not answer that then so be it - I can not force them. But I am not about to stop asking because you want to have a rant about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptsum
No, you do not have the right to question another person's belief you only have the right to question your own, not others
I can question what I like. I have that right. You are not about to remove it from me. Or as they say in the venacular "Try stopping me".
This is very disingenuous, monumentus and you know it. What you are doing is equivalent to denying a claim that the occipital lobe of the brain is responsible for turning the countless individual photons that impact our retina into an inverted composite of the world we see . . . because it can not be "backed up" or explained in a sentence or post or two on this forum. I spent five posts, each approaching the maximum limit in length for C-D, to provide the supporting evidence and rationale for my claims. Then you have the gall to just dismiss and deny it all and ask that I back it up!!! It takes big ones! Disagree all you wish . . . but don't pretend you have asked something reasonable.
There is nothing disingenuous with asking someone what the back up for their position actually is. YOU are the one making the claim so the onus is on YOU to back it up. So once again - if you think the universe is concious I want to know what evidence you have for this. If you think the claims of Christianity are true - I want to know what evience you have for this. And so on.
If you have none or refuse to give it then so be it. Admit that and I will happily stop asking. It is the obfuscation and dodging that is bothersome.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
There has been no request for and no claim to provide a PROOF for God's existence, Amazn. What has been requested and provided is scientific evidence and rationale SUPPORTING the existence of God as plausible, reasonable and consistent with existing scientific knowledge.
Indeed. So whenever you want to start doing that is fine with me.
It is certainly true that people are entitled to their beliefs or theories and don't have to present their evidence - but can't expect to be believed if they don't.
If they do, then they can expect to be challenged. If their theory fails to deliver, then their insistence that it has is going to be ridiculed. Goes with the territory. A retreat to 'everyone's entitles to their own opinion..' is simply irrelevant if not dishonest.
I'm not targeting Mystic or anyone else here, specifically. It's general debate principles.
There is nothing disingenuous with asking someone what the back up for their position actually is. YOU are the one making the claim so the onus is on YOU to back it up. So once again - if you think the universe is concious I want to know what evidence you have for this. If you think the claims of Christianity are true - I want to know what evience you have for this. And so on.
If you have none or refuse to give it then so be it. Admit that and I will happily stop asking. It is the obfuscation and dodging that is bothersome.
Indeed. So whenever you want to start doing that is fine with me.
You have repeatedly been told that it is ALL in my Synthesis and rather than address the Synthesis point by point . . . you just assert that it does not do what I claim it does. If you intend to make this a "He said He said" debate I want no part of it. I have already produced a considerable body of evidence and rationale as the basis for my views . . . you have NOT and seem disinclined to do so. Until you do . . . your assessments of my work are irrelevant and baseless.
It is certainly true that people are entitled to their beliefs or theories and don't have to present their evidence - but can't expect to be believed if they don't.
If they do, then they can expect to be challenged. If their theory fails to deliver, then their insistence that it has is going to be ridiculed. Goes with the territory. A retreat to 'everyone's entitles to their own opinion..' is simply irrelevant if not dishonest.
Lying cannot exist when the claims made are backed by an extensive and complete explanation and rationale for them, period. Mere claims that a "theory fails to deliver" can be proffered by total morons and idiots without any basis or credibility, Arequipa. The ONLY way such claims can be credible is for them to counter with specific arguments addressing the theories main features. No mere poster on a public forum who has NOT provided any comprehensive rationale for their OWN position is going to be given the power to deny someone else's well-presented and complete rationale by mere assertion and ridicule.
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.
