Just came back and seems like everything has exploded in argument.
To clarify my argument-
Proof must be determined by one of three things
Observation
Inquiry
Credible Information
Observation doesn't work in arguments for Christianity, because there are so many OTHER religions where people claim to observe THEIR God. The obvious answer here is that none of them are correct. For instance, two people are arguing over whether Car X is Red or Blue. They each have documents "verifying" the existence of Car X. However, one person states "I saw car X the other day, and it was red" while the other states "No, Car X was blue. I know because I saw it".
Obvious answer-Since the "facts" contradict each other, Car X doesn't exist, as there is no real evidence for it in the form of photography, video, etc.
And also, I wasn't claiming that all claims require empirical evidence. Inquiry also works too.
To clarify my argument-
Proof must be determined by one of three things
Observation
Inquiry
Credible Information
Observation doesn't work in arguments for Christianity, because there are so many OTHER religions where people claim to observe THEIR God. The obvious answer here is that none of them are correct. For instance, two people are arguing over whether Car X is Red or Blue. They each have documents "verifying" the existence of Car X. However, one person states "I saw car X the other day, and it was red" while the other states "No, Car X was blue. I know because I saw it".
Obvious answer-Since the "facts" contradict each other, Car X doesn't exist, as there is no real evidence for it in the form of photography, video, etc.
And also, I wasn't claiming that all claims require empirical evidence. Inquiry also works too.
¨I contend that we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you. When you understand why you dismiss all other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.¨
