(October 1, 2015 at 7:42 am)Randy Carson Wrote: [...]As for the rest, I'm spending my time discussing something that I believe in. You, however, are spending YOUR time discussing something that you apparently don't believe in.
Which one of us is "wasting" his life?
I'm discussing something that I know - that religious people of different creeds have mutually exclusive claims and no evidence for any of them.
You're wasting your time trying to rationalize your particular brand of magical thinking and putting on a pretense of academic diligence, by cherry-picking from what other emotionally invested apologists happened to have published on the internet. It's a futile task - and strictly unnecessary one, since even the vast majority of believers admit that the idea is to believe without evidence - or indeed despite copious evidence to the contrary.
(October 1, 2015 at 8:21 am)Randy Carson Wrote: But I don't actually believe there is an absence of evidence. I simply state that for YOUR benefit since YOU believe there is no evidence.
Oh, there IS evidence, alright...lots of it. But not coercive credible evidence that FORCES you to believe convinces anyone who's not already emotionally invested in the belief.
There - I corrected that statement for you...
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one." - George Bernard Shaw
