(August 28, 2017 at 1:42 pm)SteveII Wrote:(August 28, 2017 at 1:16 pm)bennyboy Wrote: What you don't get is that it is up to the one hearing an idea to establish the quality of evidence required. If I've known someone a long time, then even very weak evidence is acceptable. . . to me. If I perceive a person to be honest, then their testimony is good enough. . . for me. If enough people speak in moving terms about how the Flying Spaghetti Monster saved their miserable lives, then their testimony is good enough. . . for me.
So. . . start producing testimony, and I'll tell you if I consider it sufficiently strong for me to adopt the God idea.
How do you know "I don't get"? I don't disagree with your first three sentences. It also has nothing to do with the topic/point I was making.
As to your last sentence, that is not the topic of this thread or this subforum.
Presumably your point was that I'm clinging to an unsupported assertion in order to preserve my objection to the evidence for Christianity, since you had in fact bolded that point.
I'm telling you that there's no internal struggle, no particular effort needed. You seem to think the trumpets of truth are blaring throughout the Universe, and I'm struggling with all my might and with my hands over my ears not to hear it.
This is not the case. You hold ideas which I do not accept as likely to represent truth. If you want me to seriously consider, and potentially accept, your ideas, you'll have to demonstrate the quality and kind of evidence which will convince ME.
