Christian Paradox

[fr0d0]

Don't change the subject... own your position.

[you continue to repeat the illogic we've already dismissed in another thread, which you refuse to address]

Conveniently your poor memory lets you repeat your blind assertions like they're actually still applicable.

You failed to refute those assertions, log them for all to see and merely insulted him. Please either correct that or consider your aforementioned statement as is quoted as lacking proof and therefore irrelevant to this discussion.

Did you not read the thread Syn? I pointed out tavares' logical fallacies and all he did was reword and repeat them. I don't consider this a refutation. Tavares was liberal with the insults and attempted derision where I was not. This is entirely relevant to tavares repeating the unsupported assertion already refuted successfully like it hadn't been.

Fact is Rhiz... your position is no more sure than mine. My point. You shouldn't feel so self righteous as to infer superiority like you do.

If I believe in God, evidence is everywhere. If I don't, it isn't. I'm pretty sure you didn't need that pointing out to you. If you were expecting verifiable evidence of the transcendental... may I recommend counselling.

The position of lacking a belief in a deity is logical due to the lack of verifiable evidence of one. It doesn't dismiss such deity, simply is a lack of belief in it. Hence to a logical mind, one does not believe in a god. Since you stated that belief has a non-verifiable clause, which is inherently impossible to verify and hence a lack of belief is the only logical course (indecision until evidence is provided to make a decision), it appears to me that a logical being does not believe in any deity.

Disbelief is no more logical than belief. That you choose to use illogic to support you position doesn't make it stronger.

---

Don't change the subject... own your position.

[you continue to repeat the illogic we've already dismissed in another thread, which you refuse to address]

Conveniently your poor memory lets you repeat your blind assertions like they're actually still applicable.

You continue to dig a hole for yourself and lack the intellectual honesty to admit any wrongdoing. Arguing with you has turned into nothing less than a clusterfuck because you fail to realize what a logical point of view would be.

You say your point of view if logical? Prove it. What is your evidence for such a claim? I told you my reasoning.

You showed me your illogic is all... and I pointed out why very clearly. Perhaps you would like to deal with that rather than waving your arms around pointlessly.

Fact is Rhiz... your position is no more sure than mine. My point. You shouldn't feel so self righteous as to infer superiority like you do.

*buzzzz* Wrong!

You're making a positive claim by saying God exists. Rhiz rejects your claim on the basis that you cannot provide evidence.

Open your mouth... here it comes:

Not in this thread. Rhiz made the comment that somehow belief is illogical - which is unsubstantiated. He made the positive claim... I called him on it.

If I believe in God, evidence is everywhere. If I don't, it isn't. I'm pretty sure you didn't need that pointing out to you. If you were expecting verifiable evidence of the transcendental... may I recommend counselling.

If you believe in something, evidence is everywhere. I understand.

This is called rationalization and confirmation bias. We've discussed this before. Just because you make things fit in your head doesn't make them true for anyone else. I can't take your word for it. Please understand this.

Again with the holier than thou attitude.

You are also biased... moot point.

Fact is Rhiz... your position is no more sure than mine. My point. You shouldn't feel so self righteous as to infer superiority like you do.

Self-righteous? LO fucking L! It is LOGIC I claim not righteousness. I'm not even that logical, but I have at least sorted out that if a thing is not evinced, then it probably doesn't exist and I will hold out for evidence. Maybe if I start worshipping Baal (or was it Astoreth? I forget), God might see fit to burn another offering with a large flame that comes wooshing down from the clouds even after water was poured out upon it.

That isn't logic Rhiz.. it's fallacial. You're demanding evidence of the transcendal. Do you not see the absurdity of your position?