(September 25, 2011 at 10:29 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: ECREE. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Christian claims are extraordinary to say the least.
Actually they are not, a majority of people living today believe the supernatural exists, and so by definition atheism is the extraordinary claim. Look up the words ordinary and extraordinary.
Quote: Even if these philoso-babble arguments were sound (we've been all over why they're not convincing)
A sound argument is not necessarily convincing to an irrational mind, that’s why an argument’s soundness is not determined by whether or not a person like you is convinced by it.
Quote: they would still fail to meet their burden of proof.
Where do you come up with this garbage? A deductively sound argument is more than enough to meet the burden of proof; it’s the strongest argument that can even be presented.
Quote: Conjecture, abstract ideas and theoretical models, even if they make perfect sense, can't substitute for experimentation and hard evidence. The universe is under no obligation to conform to our concepts of what makes sense to us. It sometimes happen that the universe works in ways that we consider counter-intuitive. Simply offering a philosophical argument, even if it is based on sound reasoning (as opposed to an attempt to rationalize the sacred belief already held), at best makes it a hypothesis that is yet to be tested.
You do realize that empiricism is a self refuting position right? So why did you appeal to it above?
Quote: Where is the evidence for the extraordinary claims of Christianity? If all they've got is philoso-babble, they've already fallen short of the burden of proof before we even examine the soundness of their logic.
A logically sound argument is irrefutable. That’s probably why you resort to this sort of whining.
