(March 12, 2015 at 2:13 pm)Godschild Wrote:(March 12, 2015 at 1:28 pm)robvalue Wrote: If "personal evidence" should be considered enough for someone to believe you, then we'd all have to believe anything anyone ever told us.
See the flaw in that system?
I didn't say that, why do you and the rest a have a hard time understanding things. I said the evidence is for me and if you want the same evidence you'll have to make changes and find it yourselves. You can't prove I do not have such evidence, but you'll disregard it at the toss of a hat. You have no interest in finding out what the Christians here know, blinding yourselves allows you to stay safe in your non-belief.
GC
The burden is on you to provide evidence to the contary that "God", exists. There is a great deal of difference between Richard Dawkins stating that "we cannot prove he doesn't exist", and the bible stating God does indeed exist. As far as the bible is concerned, it is an affirmation, whereas from Dawkins, it is speculative. Either way, you have to prove rather than the other way around.
