RE: MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)
December 15, 2014 at 8:23 pm
(December 15, 2014 at 5:11 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: ...Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
...Have you ever been behind the sun? So how do you know that my God isn't behind the sun?? There is no way you can wiggle out of it, either...you've never been behind the sun, so you simply don't know...plain and simple...so for you to sit there and make these absolute statements, these claims of knowledge, is fallacious.
That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Again, these are the rules we play by in every area of life outside your favorite religious beliefs. Otherwise, you would be compelled to consider countless possibilities that you have no time to consider.
A man who hears voices or speaks to people who aren't there is considered to be crazy. It's not required that we prove the voices aren't real unseen spirits or that there isn't an invisible bunny rabbit to put such a man away.
It's called "the null hypothesis". X is assumed to not exist until proven otherwise. It is always within the bounds of rational skepticism to say "X doesn't exist" where there is no evidence for X. Those who believe in X are compelled to provide evidence for X's existence. Saying "Oh yeah, well prove X doesn't exist" is a classic shifting of the burden of proof.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
