Any Theists on AF, I Challenge You to a Debate on the Existence of God

[fr0d0]

Now the information that we possess and accept on the problem are not the same, hence the different stances on belief.

I don't understand what this means. What information do you have that I don't? What information are you accepting that I don't?

Logical proofs of God. What you and I understand are different which is why we believe differently. I accept religious information to be true. You understand it some other way besides true information. We have the same availability of information but can interpret that information individually. No two persons have the same understanding.

You agree there is no supernatural evidence. Therefor there is no logical reason to believe anything supernatural even exists. Just because we define something using words, it doesn't in any way make it real, or even possible.

I don't agree that there is no supernatural evidence. I think supernatural evidence is a logical fallacial statement that needs exorcising.

It definitely does not follow that it is logical to believe that nothing supernatural exists. Again, that is totally illogical. You cannot know, so you cannot comment on what you don't know. you have no way of finding out. Because we can define something logically makes the existence of something logical logically possible. We don't KNOW if it exists or not. This is our only correct scientific conclusion.

Again, it sounds to me like you're using a totally different way to come to conclusions than me (and other sceptics). You seem to be changing the level of evidence you are willing to accept for a claim based on how much you want the claim to be true. That's fine, but to call it logic is misguided.

You seem to be making claims with no relation to science or logic. I don't find that meets my standard for 'skeptic'.

Plum has it right, something being possible does not in any way demonstrate that it is true.

That's why I said it was 50/50 yes.

---

fr0d0 I would agree that it is highly unlikely that there will be natural explanation for the supernatural. However before placing that claim please establish the plausibility of the 'supernatural'.

I claim to believe in a supernatural entity, to be clear. It's plausibility rests in its application. It explains purpose.