A challenge!

[Iroscato]

I know, I am waiting for Admins to set it up!

have you tried a PM?

Indeed. You don't get anything if you don't ask MK...

[Tonus]

I find in telling people already know there are no proofs for God before proofs are presented. *smiles*

After centuries of searching for truth, no one has come up with proofs that convince even half of the people in the world. Most religions are fragmented into many denominations, some of which are willing to kill one another over their differences. If your proofs cannot get those groups to find common ground, how valid can they possibly be?

[Astonished]

have you tried a PM?

Indeed. You don't get anything if you don't ask MK...

Well obviously he's asked god to do it, and is waiting for him to touch the hearts of the admins so that they do it. Which is why it hasn't happened, or ever will, for obvious reasons.

Let me just ask, MK, for cripes' sake, without going into detail, what points would you be presenting as evidence? Because they're either going to be anecdotal (worthless), fallacious (waste of time), fraudulent (even bigger waste of time), or attacking the credibility of the opposition (which, since we don't have the burden of proof, makes you stupid AND an asshole). There's literally never any deviation from this limited list, though I may have missed a point or two of other failures that theists resort to in every debate ever.

[Asmodee]

I find in telling people already know there are no proofs for God before proofs are presented. *smiles*

There were valid arguments presented before, what was disputed was not the validity of the argument, but if all the premises were sound. So I have new angles and arguments to prove all the premises are sound.

Why do you in haste conclude there is no evidence or proof?

Even you don't claim to be offering "proofs".  What you have is an argument that you believe can "prove" some deity exists if you can just get the wording exactly right.  It's essentially a trick of language that you have.  Nothing more.  We know that there are no "proofs" because so many before you have come with philosophical tricks and nonsense pretending they're "proofs".  It's all logical "if/then" statements worded in such a way as to be just confusing and vague enough to make them difficult to respond to and, when someone does, you have plenty of wiggle room to narrow them down a little, just enough to exclude their argument.

And if a single premise isn't sound the argument is not valid, so disputing the validity of the premises is disputing the validity of the argument.

[Simon Moon]

I find in telling people already know there are no proofs for God before proofs are presented. *smiles*

There is nothing new.

Collectively, we have heard all arguments ever presented.

Yours are not new. They are just different versions of the same old, same old...

There were valid arguments presented before, what was disputed was not the validity of the argument, but if all the premises were sound. So I have new angles and arguments to prove all the premises are sound.

No they weren't.

I can remember refuting the validity of your arguments. I was almost always ignored.

Why do you in haste conclude there is no evidence or proof?

Because we have heard it all.

I am always open to demonstrable evidence, reasoned argument and valid and sound logic to support the claim that a god or gods exist. But if all you have to offer are variations of long refuted arguments, save us all the time.

[Asmodee]

I find in telling people already know there are no proofs for God before proofs are presented. *smiles*

There is nothing new.

Collectively, we have heard all arguments ever presented.

Yours are not new. They are just different versions of the same old, same old...

There were valid arguments presented before, what was disputed was not the validity of the argument, but if all the premises were sound. So I have new angles and arguments to prove all the premises are sound.

No they weren't.

I can remember refuting the validity of your arguments. I was almost always ignored.

Why do you in haste conclude there is no evidence or proof?

Because we have heard it all.

I am always open to demonstrable evidence, reasoned argument and valid and sound logic to support the claim that a god or gods exist. But if all you have to offer are variations of long refuted arguments, save us all the time.

At this point I'm not even open to arguments.  There is no logical argument which is going to magic God into existence any more than there is any logical argument which is going to prove that magic isn't real.  If you say that you're open to "reasoned arguments" you're only inviting these same, tired old shit arguments where the theist thinks that if they can just be witty enough with the wording they'll back you into a corner and you'll be forced to admit that magic is really, really real without all the bothersome nonsense of having to provide the actual evidence the various religious people and texts claim is readily available...until I ask for it.

Theists wan me to believe magic is real.  They're trying to sell be eternal life AFTER I die.  I don't care what argument you give me, I'm not buying the Brooklyn Bridge from you until you can provide EVIDENCE that you have an actual right to sell it.  How much more evidence should I ask for when you're selling me something I have to die to get, AND that thing is that I will never die?  It's almost as if they product were designed to be undisprovable, as all the best snake oils are.

[ignoramus]

In theists defence, isn't there no such thing as absolute truth?
Why do we atheists demand proof when all they need is faith?

That's why I keep saying debating god is still born.
The only mistake theists make is needing to prove anything!

CL gets it theists, why can't the rest of you?

[Astonished]

In theists defence, isn't there no such thing as absolute truth?
Why do we atheists demand proof when all they need is faith?

That's why I keep saying debating god is still born.
The only mistake theists make is needing to prove anything!

CL gets it theists, why can't the rest of you?

WTF? How is that in theists' defense if they're more often than not trying to claim that there are absolute truths, the source of which being their deity du jour? It's pretty damned easy to refute, hence why debating it is a waste of time.