RE: Completely skipped this section.
February 20, 2014 at 3:08 pm
(This post was last modified: February 20, 2014 at 3:09 pm by fr0d0.)
(February 20, 2014 at 9:44 am)Quantum Theorist Wrote: Excuse me, but you said the theologies burden of proof has been met, when it clearly hasn't. That is circular reasoning and begging the question.
Yes it has. You haven't, until this point, enquired about what that burden might be, so you're being a little presumptuous I think. Let's see...
(February 20, 2014 at 9:44 am)Quantum Theorist Wrote: Your claim is that a god exists, is it not? let's not be dishonest. That's why you tried to shirk the burden of proof onto me.
No, it is not. Existence is a claim of material substance. God is immaterial. That's a pretty basic attribute. Christians believe that God exists. Belief through faith, an acceptance if information to be true, and to trust in that information: a rational process.
So if that's the basis of your claim, you've failed on a basic ignorance of the subject, which is what I thought.
(February 20, 2014 at 9:44 am)Quantum Theorist Wrote: You claim I have the burden of proof. To prove what exactly? thus my pixie example.
I gave my opinion that religions haven't met the standards of evidence to meet the burden of proof.
How exactly is that not acceptable unless you don't understand the burden of proof...
Your burden was to show how theology failed, and it's still yours to prove.
What evidence of this non temporal being would you like to see? Please explain how that evidence could be acceptable to you, given your temporal limitations.
