RE: Completely skipped this section.
February 20, 2014 at 9:44 am
(This post was last modified: February 20, 2014 at 9:50 am by MJ the Skeptical.)
(February 20, 2014 at 1:02 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Yet still you can't tell me what the claim is?
You can't accuse me of circular reasoning until I produce a reason that is circular. If you're going to make my argument for me then that's a sure way to win
Excuse me, but you said the theologies burden of proof has been met, when it clearly hasn't. That is circular reasoning and begging the question.
Your claim is that a god exists, is it not? let's not be dishonest. That's why you tried to shirk the burden of proof onto me.
This can't possibly be civil if you're going to pretend you aren't advocating for your Christian sky daddy.
You claim I have the burden of proof. To prove what exactly? thus my pixie example.
I gave my opinion that religions haven't met the standards of evidence to meet the burden of proof.
How exactly is that not acceptable unless you don't understand the burden of proof...
If the hypothetical idea of an afterlife means more to you than the objectively true reality we all share, then you deserve no respect.
