(April 27, 2014 at 7:10 am)fr0d0 Wrote:(April 26, 2014 at 9:36 pm)Rampant.A.I. Wrote: you can't provide reasoning what distinguishes belief in the supernatural from belief in supernatural entities, which you claim are not the same, nor a belief in any given supernatural entity with no evidence from beliefs in any other supernatural entity with no evidence.
Still not bothering to read then rumpy
Who the hell cares? ... Is the point.
You claim your belief in one specific supernatural entity is rational, and belief in other supernatural entities is irrational, but cannot substantiate why.
(April 27, 2014 at 7:10 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Your question is totally irrelevant
Problem: supernatural entities do not exist in nature
Question from moron: why are they different in this respect
It's perfectly relevant, and throwing a fit shows how uncomfortable you are that you dismiss any given supernatural entities out of hand as irrational superstition, yet define belief in your specific supernatural entity as "rational."
You do the exact same this you moan about atheists doing: reject supernatural claims lacking evidence.
This entire thread is dedicated to a special pleading argument demanding evidence to disbelieve in the supernatural, when you yourself don't have any evidence to disbelieve supernatural claims you reject.
Congrats on the failed thread, and showing just how fallacious your reasoning is.
