(September 6, 2009 at 5:16 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Thanks for your answer Kyu. For your kindness, and for your honesty.
What kindness? To paraphrase Dawkins, I may not be right but I always say what I believe to be correct ... it would be pointless to say anything else.
(September 6, 2009 at 5:16 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: Of course none of those things would ever constitute evidence for God. Anything evidential has then to be included in 'natural'/ as obeying the physical nature of the Universe.
Fair enough but the ONLY reason your god is beyond that is BECAUSE YOU DEFINE IT TO BE SO ... what I dispute is the validity of the DEFINITION!! I simply DO NOT and NEVER WILL accept that a god of any kind can act upon this universe WITHOUT LEAVING A TRAIL OF EVIDENCE!
Here's the answer you're looking for:
So my answer, that I have no idea actually testifies to the fact that I do not accept it can happen without evidence and NOT to the way you twist it to mean.
Kyu
Angry Atheism
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!
Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!
Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator
