How much of the Bible do you believe literally?

[EvolutionKills]

It's dificult, becuase not even you have any fuckling idea what you're talking about with the shit you make up to hide your god further and further away.

You don't particularly have to hide something you can't even see but you could say God is "hidden in plain sight" which is a term I like.

If you claim that your god is non-physical, then you need to establish that anything non-physical can exist!

Consciousness is an example of something non-physical you can't see that, yes it's related to the physical brain in some way and science can study that aspect of it.

How do you do that? I don't know, but it's not my problem

It is if you're demanding that something has to be proved. If it can't be proved there isn't going to be any burden to prove it.

, because I'm not the one claiming it as a divine loophole for my god-concept.

God was always meant to be non-physical from the beginning it's not something new that has been invented to count the killer God argument from atheism. Perhaps it wasn't a killer argument to begin with.

If you claim that your god exists outside of the universe

Transcendent beyond it and immanent within it but of course there's no way to demonstrate state this scientifically. You can either believe it or you don't.

, then you need to establish just how does one do this and the evidence to support the existence of anything outside of our universe. How would you do that? I don't know, but it's not my problem, because I'm not the one claiming it as a divine loophole for my god-concept.

It isn't loophole if God was defined this way from the beginning. It's more that you have attempted to level an argument against the concept that doesn't really work. You have a burden of proof only if it is actually possible to prove something. In the same way atheists have no burden of proof.

When you make a claim, the burden of proof is on you; and everything else that entails. You need to get the evidence to support your assertions

You have to settle for something else to back the claim that doesn't depend on science if what is claimed can't be demonstrated by ability of science to demonstrate. So that's the kind of thing WLC or whoever will do, they will use reason and philosophy various other justifications to back the claim/faith. That's the only way you can really do it, that and spend time in prayer/meditation and foster some subjective experience. Science is a useful tool for understanding the universe but that's all it can cover.

and if even you don't have a fucking clue how to go about getting that evidence, then it's very telling just how much bullshit and unsubstanciated your initial claim really is.

Theism and God a faith in God is one kind of claim and atheism/materialism or naturalism and the denial of the existence of God is a different claim. You can't prove either claim with science therefore you can't really apply this burden of proof you have to move onto some other argument.

For starters, your formatting sucks; work on that in the future.

In an effort to not butcher the forums any further by dignifying the chop work you made out of a simple 7 sentence post, I can sum up everything in just one sentence this time.


Take your presuppositional bullshit and shove back up your ass.

[Marvin]

How much of the Bible do you believe literally?

The cover, I literally believe a book with Bible printed on the cover is a bible, after checking it's not hollowed out and holding a flask whiskey or a hard drive of kiddy porn of course.