Arguing god into existence. What a novel and unique position.

http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/2...stence.htm

(December 15, 2015 at 4:37 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(December 15, 2015 at 4:27 pm)Delicate Wrote: There's a lot to say about the evidence, and how it's supposed to sit with Christian theism.

But here's a taste: https://www.calvin.edu/academic/philosop...uments.pdf

Wow, that's long. I'll have to take a look. Did you write it?

No. It's just lecture notes. There's some great stuff out there. I take it you're Catholic. Are you interested in this sort of thing?

*eyeroll*

(December 15, 2015 at 4:39 pm)Delicate Wrote: You expect me to take this bullshit seriously?

I have no expectation that you take anything seriously. I'm simply exposing your inanity.

No, she's not a Catholic. She chose her name because she likes licking cat holes.

(December 15, 2015 at 4:42 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: *eyeroll*

Most substantial atheist post in the history of this forum.

(December 15, 2015 at 4:16 pm)Delicate Wrote: One of the standard mantras atheists are taught to say is "I'm not an atheist because I have seen no evidence for God."

Umm....WUT?  Don't you need one more negative to cancel out the double negative in that "standard atheist mantra"?

(December 15, 2015 at 4:33 pm)Cato Wrote: Fucking dolt. I already handed you your ass on this in the other thread. I'll repeat the argument anyway.

Evidence for QM exists regardless of any individual's ignorance. The evidence is made available and is repeatable for any and all to see and participate in if they so choose. The same cannot be said for supposed evidence for god. If there was one shred of evidence it would be made known immediately for all to see. The fact that instead of demonstrating said evidence you choose to say that we are too blind to see suggests you have absolutely nothing.

There is also no such thing as theistic evidence. You've got nothing but bullshit arguments that setup some type of ignorant quandary in which to insert your notion of god. It's ridiculous, it's not evidence. You cannot define or argue your deity into existence.

Instead of proving anything I'm saying as wrong, all you can manage is to call it names. 

Thanks for making my point.

This is why you're a joke. Nothing you have to say here has merit. 0/10. Now sit down.

(December 15, 2015 at 4:53 pm)Strongbad Wrote:

(December 15, 2015 at 4:16 pm)Delicate Wrote: One of the standard mantras atheists are taught to say is "I'm not an atheist because I have seen no evidence for God."

Umm....WUT?  Don't you need one more negative to cancel out the double negative in that "standard atheist mantra"?

Good catch.

(December 15, 2015 at 4:16 pm)Delicate Wrote: One of the standard mantras atheists are taught to say is "I'm not an atheist because I have seen no evidence for God."

Assumes we atheists are carefully coached in how to respond to idiot missionary apologists. There is no atheist school, degree or religion. You are simply projecting erroneously from your own experience.

(December 15, 2015 at 4:16 pm)Delicate Wrote: This is not a convincing reason to be an atheist. Why?

It's possible for someone to be too blind or too ignorant to see or understand the evidence. Just like a toddler might say "I see no evidence of the validity of Quantum Mechanics" or a blind woman might say "I see no evidence of the existence of colors" the problem might be with the person and not the evidence.

You have this turned around. There is no need for a convincing reason not to believe the bullocks you're serving up. The onus is on you as the person seeking agreement to make the case.

In truth, even if you made a credible effort -which you haven't- I would still be under no requirement to listen. There are many projects and understandings to pursue. Which crack pot supernatural bullshit to believe is nothing I'm interested in. Can you find your own way out or do you need my boot to your butt?

(December 15, 2015 at 4:16 pm)Delicate Wrote: Clearly, if the atheist wants the public to believe that there is no evidence, they have to be able to respond meaningfully to purported examples of theistic evidence.

You assume -incorrectly in my case- that atheists should all feel compelled to debunk your bullshit. There is no such requirement. Many atheists will go to great pains to disabuse you of your whacko beliefs. I've got better things to do.
 

(December 15, 2015 at 4:16 pm)Delicate Wrote: Atheists here, for the most part are not competent enough to do this.

Said with a sneer no doubt. But again you take as incompetence what is often disinterest. No one can flat out disprove that your silly gods exist. Silly things are beyond the reach of reason. But there are many here who would go out their way to set you straight - but why bother? It isn't as if you're here to decide what you think. Your mind is made up. See ya.
 

(December 15, 2015 at 4:16 pm)Delicate Wrote: And hence, when someone says they are an atheist because they have seen no evidence, the best response seems to be to send them to an optometrist.

You're right we should just say we don't really give a fuck even though it is also true that no one has ever been able to point a god out to me.