(April 4, 2013 at 2:28 pm)thesummerqueen Wrote: The only reason it continues to get presented is because it hasn't be refuted in the minds of believers who'd rather stick their heads in the sand. That statement is equally true about atheists or theists, depending on what they're believing in without good evidence.
Which arguments are you referring to?
(April 4, 2013 at 2:39 pm)Mr Infidel Wrote: Just to add something I should have thought about in my previous post: We do not have formal debates in regards to attempting to prove the existence or nonexistence of leprechauns. Therefore, it is just as silly to do it in terms of god, when there is just as much evidence for his existence as there is for the leprechaun's existence.
I am sorry, but this statement is rather silly, a claim for the existence of a material creature cannot be properly compared to a claim for the existence of a transcendent immaterial creator god. I don’t know why atheists always assume there should be some sort of material “evidence” that demonstrates God exists, what sort of evidence would you even expect to find? Are all truth claims verified by measuring evidence? That seems to be quite a simplistic view of epistemology.
