Telling children that they are going to hell is abusive?

[The Grand Nudger]

I don't think so. Our buddy Comfort isn't likely to call islamic magic book or any hadith evidence that christer god is bullshit.

He knows better, he understands that he doesn't have evidence perfectly well. He's just a whining sack of dishonest shit, lol.

[ColdComfort]

I don't think so.  Our buddy Comfort isn't likely to call islamic magic book or any hadith evidence that christer god is bullshit.  

He knows better, he understands that he doesn't have evidence perfectly well.  He's just a whining sack of dishonest shit, lol.

You're wrong about me. I would say the Quran is evidence that the Christian bible is untrue. It says things about Jesus that contradicts what the NT says. It just happens to be very bad evidence, like a witness in court who is exposed as a liar.  

Now you keep saying I don't understand what evidence is. I use the word in the normal everyday sense. I've made it clear what I mean. So, you must be using the word evidence in some sort of eccentric way. Tell me what you mean by evidence and perhaps we can get off the roller coaster. Wikipedia will do:

[b]Evidence[/b], broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion.[1] This support may be strong or weak. 

Clearly, on this definition the NT is evidence of the existence of hell. So is what Our Lady said at Fatima about hell. I'll repeat what I said before: by using the words 'no evidence' instead of 'evidence I don't accept' you don't have to actually give reasons or arguments for your point of view. And that's because internet atheists are a particularly uninformed and ignorant lot.

BTW, I don't trust your honesty and that you are giving a true account of this Platinga fellow's views. I know nothing about him but give me a source where you have become familiar with his views. I find it hard to believe you have actually read any of his books. You don't strike me as someone who reads books at all.

[ColdComfort]

I don't think so.  Our buddy Comfort isn't likely to call islamic magic book or any hadith evidence that christer god is bullshit.  

He knows better, he understands that he doesn't have evidence perfectly well.  He's just a whining sack of dishonest shit, lol.

You must be using the word 'evidence' in a an eccentric way. or more likely just being jerk. Wikipedia will do for such a simple word:

[b]Evidence[/b], broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion.[1] This support may be strong or weak. 

Clearly, on this definition the NT is evidence of hell as is what Our Lady said at Fatima. Define how you use evidence please.

---

Thought I lost the first post.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I don't think so.  Our buddy Comfort isn't likely to call islamic magic book or any hadith evidence that christer god is bullshit.  

He knows better, he understands that he doesn't have evidence perfectly well.  He's just a whining sack of dishonest shit, lol.

You must be using the word 'evidence' in a an eccentric way. or more likely just being jerk. Wikipedia will do for such a simple word:

[b]Evidence[/b], broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion.[1] This support may be strong or weak. 

Clearly, on this definition the NT is evidence of hell as is what Our Lady said at Fatima. Define how you use evidence please.

---

Thought I lost the first post.

It was mistakenly caught in the spam filter. Fixed it for you.

Boru

[The Grand Nudger]

Same as you post it above. Something that supports an assertion.

How does the nt or fatima support your assertion of hell?

The platinga bit probably belongs in the platinga thread - but ofc you don't have to trust me, you can read his argument for yourself.

[ColdComfort]

You must be using the word 'evidence' in a an eccentric way. or more likely just being jerk. Wikipedia will do for such a simple word:

[b]Evidence[/b], broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion.[1] This support may be strong or weak. 

Clearly, on this definition the NT is evidence of hell as is what Our Lady said at Fatima. Define how you use evidence please.

---

Thought I lost the first post.

It was mistakenly caught in the spam filter. Fixed it for you.

Boru

Thanks

---

Same as you post it above.  Something that supports an assertion.

How does the nt or fatima support your assertion of hell?

The platinga bit probably belongs in the platinga thread - but ofc you don't have to trust me, you can read his argument for yourself.

Why won't you give me a source for your information on this writer? Embarrassed about something? You haven't read a single word by him have you? 


As for the other subject, you are going to have to explain to me why the NT and the words of Our Lady are not evidence of hell. You need to give me reasons not mere assertions. Bet you can't.   

[Fake Messiah]

It also reminds me that atheists are a particularly irrational bunch. My guess is very few atheists have ever looked at the evidence from Fatima.

Actually atheists looked into Marian appearances and found it to be very irrational

[The Grand Nudger]

---

Same as you post it above.  Something that supports an assertion.

How does the nt or fatima support your assertion of hell?

The platinga bit probably belongs in the platinga thread - but ofc you don't have to trust me, you can read his argument for yourself.

Why won't you give me a source for your information on this writer? Embarrassed about something? You haven't read a single word by him have you? 

We have this policy about not stomping all over threads with other threads.  The conversation continues in thread.  You can return to it anytime you like.  

As for the other subject, you are going to have to explain to me why the NT and the words of Our Lady are not evidence of hell. You need to give me reasons not mere assertions. Bet you can't.   

No, lol, I'm not.  You claim that they are evidence.  I don't know how they would be, or even could be.  So I'm asking you.  The person who says that they are.  

Jesus christ, how difficult can this be?  In what way does the nt or fatima support the assertion that hell exists?

[ColdComfort]

It also reminds me that atheists are a particularly irrational bunch. My guess is very few atheists have ever looked at the evidence from Fatima.

Actually atheists looked into Marian appearances and found it to be very irrational

Ha. Dawkins uses the words 'no evidence' too. What he means is evidence he does not accept. Then he just makes the assertion that these people would have gotten better anyway. How does he know? He doesn't of course. In fairness to Dawkins, you are not going to deal adequately with the evidence of Marian appearances in a short youtube video. The Church takes years to investigate and in the case of medical cures relies on the expertise of doctors both Christian and non-believers. On the other hand an honest man would have said I haven't looked at the medical evidence with the assistance of experts. But Dawkins is not an honest man.

I call him dishonest, and not merely ignorant , for good reason. In the God Delusion he said some things about the demonstrations of the existence of God given by St. Thomas. I read the book at the time and even a layman like myself could tell he didn't anything about those arguments. I am quite he never actually read them let alone took the time to understand them. He was heavily criticized in reviews for this by Christian and non-Christian philosophers. And yet after all this time he has never retracted his errors. That's dishonest.

The stuff about no limbs being regenerated is really bad logic and gives us a glimpse of where he gets his arguments.  If I show you the MRI of a person with advanced cancer with tumours all through his body. He prays at Lourdes for a cure and the next day an MRI shows he is cancer free who in heaven's name is going to say " well show me an arm that grew back". A clever man who is also a complete fool.


BTW, is youtube your main source of information? Hope not.

[Fake Messiah]

Ha. Dawkins uses the words 'no evidence' too.

That's called logic and common sense: millions of sick people and only 66 supposed healings is no evidence for a miracle.