frodo Wrote:You think that stating that there is no evidence is somehow the tiniest bit important.

O.O

Apart from your god, could you give me an example of a few claims which thrive from lack of evidence? It's not that I find your position ridiculous (well actually...), I'm just curious as to which kinds of claims can be made without evidence being important. Obviously "cats exist" would suffer if there was a lack of cats/paw prints/cat fossils/cat poo.

(June 26, 2009 at 4:35 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Is there a God is a question for everyone, believer and non believer. Both of us have exactly the same evidence to go on. You think that stating that there is no evidence is somehow the tiniest bit important. It isn't. Belief in God relies on there being no evidence. I fail to see how you can't grasp this. I've provided proofs of my reasoning and you've provided none. Cough up!

The point is not that I'm saying you can't believe without evidence...but that it's irrational to do so because I have no idea why God should be an exception to the matter!!

EvF

(June 26, 2009 at 5:33 pm)LukeMC Wrote:

frodo Wrote:You think that stating that there is no evidence is somehow the tiniest bit important.

O.O

Apart from your god, could you give me an example of a few claims which thrive from lack of evidence? It's not that I find your position ridiculous (well actually...), I'm just curious as to which kinds of claims can be made without evidence being important. Obviously "cats exist" would suffer if there was a lack of cats/paw prints/cat fossils/cat poo.

No Luke.. we're talking about God - y'know... the one where there can be no evidence??

Whether there can be evidence or not. Should you just believe without it? Despite the fact there 'cannot' if there could be evidence....then there would be a reason to believe if there was some.

Regardless of if there can be evidence or not. Why is it rational to believe God exists without it? When on the matter of most usual matters, evidence is required to believe and to just go ahead and believe without it is considered irrational.

EvF

(June 26, 2009 at 7:00 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: No Luke.. we're talking about God - y'know... the one where there can be no evidence??

Just your god? What about everybody elses? What about every other myth and fable, transcendent fairy and wacky cartoon character? As far as I'm concerned they're beyond our universe but who knows? We can't gather evidence for them because if they do exist outside of our books and television then they must exist on a plane we cannot investigate. As there is no possible way of gaining evidence of the other-wordly entities I must accept them on faith. In such a circumstance, I believe the Looney Toons rendition of Daffy Duck truly speaks to me and holds many universal truths.


"You're despicable!!"

It is so final, so strong.

I propose the atheist forums undergoes a mass conversion to Duckism as their can be no evidence for our saviour Daffy for he exists in a higher realm. Indeed, by reasoning through the erroneous and most certainly surreal stories told in the Looney Toons christmas special (we'll assume some of it is up for interpretation), we can all come to understand how Daffy just seems to make sense more than other trancendent special cases. He is right for us.

I'm so damn hilarious it gets hard to live with myself.
Don't take me seriously fr0d0, it's late.

Genius! I'm converting right away!!

I'm convinced!

*changes religious views on userprofile*

And what about South Park? Who wants to worship Man Bear Pig?

Genius! I'm converting right away!!

I'm convinced!

*changes religious views on userprofile*

And what about South Park? Who wants to worship Man Bear Pig?



He is truly real...I'm super, duper serial!

EvF

And so it begins...

http://despicable.org/despicable.wav

Fr0d0, once again you have this attitude that you are absolutely right and everyone else is silly or making things up for disagreeing with you. Honestly, you are the only person out of all the religious people I have spoken with or heard explain their beliefs and says there's absolutely no evidence involved with god. YOU are the one making up your own definition of things. Funny how everyone else is coming to a fairly consistent consensus and yet YOU insist we're "making it up."

However thin your basis for believing in god is, you do have a reason to believe and that reason is your proof no matter how much you refuse to admit it. Funny, despite believing in your own version of Christianity, you still believe in it. There's a reason you accept that as true. You say you have absolutely no evidence for god but you believe, but honestly, when I hear someone says it's a matter of faith, they have a reason they just don't want to admit it.

You arguments are circular and contradictory. Just because you constantly insist something is true, doesn't make it true.

Wanting evidence for god is not ridiculous, it's logical. Anyone who wants to believe what is most likely true will demand evidence, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. God requires evidence no matter how much you say otherwise.

Duckism is heresy, rAmen

(June 26, 2009 at 7:00 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: No Luke.. we're talking about God - y'know... the one where there can be no evidence??

Correction ... the one where you CLAIM there can be no evidence (a claim I dismiss as bullshit and you already know the logic behind the claim).

Kyu