RE: 3 Questions For Believers (A work in progress.)
June 30, 2014 at 11:12 pm
(This post was last modified: June 30, 2014 at 11:17 pm by Lek.)
(June 30, 2014 at 10:18 pm)Rhythm Wrote: -and I'm just trying to get you to follow through with what must follow from this statement - if you look at my life. How my life (or the existence of people like me, or how I describe myself) would modify your claim. My life, by your own reasoning - would be supporting evidence for what I;m telling you, which is no god.....
If you can answer that bit right there you'll see why your life isn't evidence for god any more than mine is evidence for no god.
Your logic is solid and scientific, but add some humanity to it. I'm searching for "the truth" and I have my idea of how a person who possesses "the truth" would act. If you are an atheist and you act in that way, then I'm going to investigate your atheist beliefs. In that case, your lifestyle would be evidence to me that you may possess "the truth".
(June 30, 2014 at 10:18 pm)Rhythm Wrote: I'll say this again..but only this last time. I'm not commenting on whether or not you are right, or I am right about gods. I'm trying to explain to you that -if- you are right..it isn't for any of the reasons you've given.....that this (and not god) is what you are "wrong" about. Not your conclusions, the manner in which you claim to have reached them.
I don't agree that my reasons don't support my belief about these incidents. I think you won't accept my reasoning because it doesn't fit within your box. If you rely totally on natural, scientific processes, you can obtain much truth. It works well for natural things, but if you won't look outside that box, then you'll be shut off from the rest of existence. It appears we may have taken this thread to it's limit, but I appreciate the discussion. I have found I need to brush up on my natural logic if I'm going to be debating atheists.
