I explained that I know of no rational reason to believe that the Bible is any more evidence or contains any more valid reasoning for GOD's existence than the FSM Gospel does for the FSM.
And that I know of no valid rational reasoning or evidence for giving God any special treatment either.
I gave my reasons...it wasn't a bare assertion.
YOU however simply barely asserting that it was "Bollocks" and that it depends if I like reasoning or shit reasoning.
THAT WAS a bare assertion that what I said was bollocks. You gave no counter argument whatsoever. And in what I said I gave my reasons and an explanation for why I didn't think the Bible should be treated any different in respect to God than the FSM Gospel should be in respect to the FSM. And how I knew of no valid, rational reasons or evidence to believe that God should get any special treatment. I gave my reasons - you responded with a bare assertion that it was "bollocks" and made a bare assertion with an implication that suggests that the Bible has more valid reasons to believe God exists than the FSM Gospel has for the FSM - and that the FSM Gospel has "shit reasoning". Well, no - the Bible's valid reasons (or evidence) to believe that God exists are just as bad as the FSM Gospel's - because they both equate to ZERO - why do I believe this? Because I have no reason to believe that the Bible should be treated any differently to the FSM Gospel or any other book when it comes to whether books can give evidence for (or valid reasons *rolls eyes*) the existence of supernatural entities.
I don't have to read the FSM Gospel to reject the FSM; to rationally disbelieve the FSM. So I don't have to read the BIBLE to reject God or to rationally disbelieve in HIM either.
And there's no reason I should give EITHER attention because it would still be special attention over the near infinite amount of OTHER undisprovable bullshit out there with no evidence whatsoever. I can't go around looking for them ALL - why should I pick out a few (like God, etc) when there's no reason to believe they're any more valid; any more probable - than any of the other extremely improbable undisprovable supernatural bullshit completely lacking in evidence that is possible to conceive of?
EvF
And that I know of no valid rational reasoning or evidence for giving God any special treatment either.
I gave my reasons...it wasn't a bare assertion.
YOU however simply barely asserting that it was "Bollocks" and that it depends if I like reasoning or shit reasoning.
THAT WAS a bare assertion that what I said was bollocks. You gave no counter argument whatsoever. And in what I said I gave my reasons and an explanation for why I didn't think the Bible should be treated any different in respect to God than the FSM Gospel should be in respect to the FSM. And how I knew of no valid, rational reasons or evidence to believe that God should get any special treatment. I gave my reasons - you responded with a bare assertion that it was "bollocks" and made a bare assertion with an implication that suggests that the Bible has more valid reasons to believe God exists than the FSM Gospel has for the FSM - and that the FSM Gospel has "shit reasoning". Well, no - the Bible's valid reasons (or evidence) to believe that God exists are just as bad as the FSM Gospel's - because they both equate to ZERO - why do I believe this? Because I have no reason to believe that the Bible should be treated any differently to the FSM Gospel or any other book when it comes to whether books can give evidence for (or valid reasons *rolls eyes*) the existence of supernatural entities.
I don't have to read the FSM Gospel to reject the FSM; to rationally disbelieve the FSM. So I don't have to read the BIBLE to reject God or to rationally disbelieve in HIM either.
And there's no reason I should give EITHER attention because it would still be special attention over the near infinite amount of OTHER undisprovable bullshit out there with no evidence whatsoever. I can't go around looking for them ALL - why should I pick out a few (like God, etc) when there's no reason to believe they're any more valid; any more probable - than any of the other extremely improbable undisprovable supernatural bullshit completely lacking in evidence that is possible to conceive of?
EvF
