(January 4, 2013 at 3:48 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote:(January 2, 2013 at 6:32 pm)Mark 13:13 Wrote: http://newcovenant.blogspot.co.uk/2004/0...proof.html
"This is a common mistake that is made by the purveyors of atheistic naturalism - that of their point of view somehow being the benchmark by which all other views must measure against..... That an atheist considers the claims of a theist to be extraordinary is irrelevant. They are assuming a benchmark which they have no way of proving as valid."
you don't give a shit about proving your position so why should I feel I am somehow in the need to prove anything to you in order to hold my position .
You should not be looking to the author of that blog for guidance, because he is a very poor guide. It is simple to illustrate the paucity of the claim that the burden of proof doesn't like on the theist position: there are tens of thousands of other proposed gods, and if there's no burden of proof for Yahweh, there isn't for any of them, which leaves one in the absurd position of having to assume they all are at least equally as likely to exist as not, despite the fact that some of them can't exist by definition if some of the others do. I've met people who hold this position, you don't strike me as being one of them, as it is at odds with being a Christian.
Burden of proof is established according to rules of logic, we're not making it up special for theism. If I say I have a two-headed chicken in an undisclosed location, and you don't believe me, there's no more of substance to say on the matter unless I am forthcoming with some reasons why you should believe me. Then we can argue about whether what I have to offer meets my burden of proof. You don't have to prove I don't have a two-headed chicken, because if I don't have it, you still can't prove it. If I said it was in the yellow coop in my backyard, you could come over and prove it wasn't there, ...and I could say I DID have it, but it escaped, and it's still out there somewhere.
That's where you're at. You say there's a God, we don't believe you. If you haven't got more to offer, we can stop there. We already know we can't prove you don't have a God, two-headed chicken, leprechaun, or whatever. All the burden of proof means is that it's your move if you want the discussion to go forward.
(January 2, 2013 at 8:26 pm)Mark 13:13 Wrote: When you die do you wish that it is the end?
When I die, what I wish will have no relevance whatsoever to what happens to me. Viewing what I'd like to believe is true with suspicion has served me very well in this life.
(January 3, 2013 at 11:42 am)Mark 13:13 Wrote: In truth I would find the Idea that death was the ultimate end comforting at one level in that I would never be accountable beyond my life for what I have done during it but at another level I would find the idea that life is a pointless accident and in the great scheme of things irrelevant no mater what we do as individuals or as a society unpallitable too. So on balance I would wish for life after death regardless of what that experience brings.
I can't think of anything that would make our lives more pointless than them being merely a momentary prelude to an endless existence, becoming ever more insignificant as each millenium passes, just as the first trillion years will be dwarfed to insignificance by the next trillion trillion, and so on forever. If there is an eternal God, I pity it for its eternal past, how unbearable the weight of infinite years must be!
Well that depends on what Eternity is; we may even Experience eternity already in this life , we just call it NOW. Eternity could be Just a NOW moment as without time there is no past or future.
