Atheists don't realize asking for evidence of God is a strawman

[The Grand Nudger]

"Context" and victory claiming...we're getting close to another christer bingo!

You know, Pool, it's easier to "refute" magic book if I -don't- have to refer to evidentiary standards.

Ahem, "lol I don't believe you, that's the dumbest shit I've ever heard..hey steve..steve, cmere...hey, tell my buddy steve what you just told me!"

[LadyForCamus]

So it comes down to, is the bible fiction? If you say that it is not, then you need to provide evidence.

I'm not claiming anything I'm just pointing out that asking for evidence for a God is a strawman.

No it's not.  Not when the Theist is claiming that they have it; usually in the form of Bible plus other stuff that isn't evidence.

[Crossless2.0]

..and I asked you to look up Biblical archeology..

That’s a good idea. You should try it sometime. Start with the archaeological evidence for the exodus.

Have fun.

[LadyForCamus]

So, what I got from Pool's OP is that he has every right to believe his religion's claims despite a total lack of evidence. *shrugs* You're welcome to believe any wacky claim you want, for any bad reason you can think of, Pool. That's not my business. I wasn't aware you felt people were telling you otherwise?

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

..and I asked you to look up Biblical archeology..

That’s a good idea. You should try it sometime. Start with the archaeological evidence for the exodus.

Have fun.

Okay, so does "your side" have all the evidence as well? Actually it doesn't. A lot of evidence is still being found. A lack of evidence doesn't mean anything.

---

So, what I got from Pool's OP is that he has every right to believe his religion's claims despite a total lack of evidence. *shrugs* You're welcome to believe any wacky claim you want, for any bad reason you can think of, Pool. That's not my business. I wasn't aware you felt people were telling you otherwise?

It's just a "gotcha"... Obviously if I said what I said in the OP it's not going to "turn" anyone because it's still just a "gotcha".. I already said in the first few pages that this is just a exercise to see some good counters..

[LadyForCamus]

That’s a good idea. You should try it sometime. Start with the archaeological evidence for the exodus.

Have fun.

Okay, so does "your side" have all the evidence as well? Actually it doesn't. A lot of evidence is still being found. A lack of evidence doesn't mean anything.

---

So, what I got from Pool's OP is that he has every right to believe his religion's claims despite a total lack of evidence.  *shrugs*  You're welcome to believe any wacky claim you want, for any bad reason you can think of, Pool.  That's not my business.  I wasn't aware you felt people were telling you otherwise?

It's just a "gotcha"... Obviously if I said what I said in the OP it's not going to "turn" anyone because it's still just a "gotcha".. I already said in the first few pages that this is just a exercise to see some good counters..

Pardon me for being confused.  I'm not sure where the "gotcha" comes in?  We talk about a lack of scientific for god's existence all the time without ever mentioning the Bible, because the Bible isn't evidence, lol.  It seems you agree with us on this point?  

Did some atheist assert that you need scientific evidence in order to believe in god, or that the Bible must live up to scientific standards in order for you believe it's contents?  If not, then you are the one strawmanning us.

[LastPoet]

Wow, so now we have the OP deliberately trying to derail his own thread.

Fuck off with your trolling

You are not here to make that determination, nor you will ever be.

Also you created a thread, but it is not yours. Any member can reply to it. You do not get to tell people to fuck off, specially if they replied to you within the forum rules.

You have done this several times in this thread.

I suggest: https://atheistforums.org/thread-51928.html

[Ravenshire]

The real strawman here is saying that only scientific claims require evidence. Any positive claim requires evidence. While some claims may require a trivial amount of evidence, others have a much higher bar.

There's an invisible man who lives in the sky, who lives us unconditionally, who wants only the best for us and who will send us to hell for offending his sensibilities is one that sets the bar very high

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

Pardon me for being confused. I'm not sure where the "gotcha" comes in? We talk about a lack of scientific for god's existence all the time without ever mentioning the Bible, because the Bible isn't evidence, lol. It seems you agree with us on this point?

So my argument is this:

* Only scientific works or works that claim that they can withstand scientific scrutiny can be subject to scientific scrutiny.

* Bible doesn't claim it's a scientific work nor does it claim that it can withstand scientific scrutiny.

* So if someone asks for scientific evidence for God it also carries a implicit claim that Bible has claimed it is a scientific work or that it can withstand scientific scrutiny. This implicit claim is what I called the straw.

---

You are not here to make that determination, nor you will ever be.

Also you created a thread, but it is not yours. Any member can reply to it. You do not get to tell people to fuck off, specially if they replied to you within the forum rules.

You have done this several times in this thread.

Okay, I've been only respectful to people that were respectful to me. I only didn't reply respectfully when that person wasn't respectful to me first. Is it not allowed to respond to disrespectful comments with disrespect?

[The Grand Nudger]

That’s a good idea. You should try it sometime. Start with the archaeological evidence for the exodus.

Have fun.

Okay, so does "your side" have all the evidence as well? Actually it doesn't. A lot of evidence is still being found. A lack of evidence doesn't mean anything.

I thought we already went over this?  Promises of evidence tomorrow demonstrate nothing today.  A lack of evidence, for example that a massive gaggle of jews wandered the desert for 40 years...means that you have no credible justification for claiming that they did, nor does magic book.  To be completely blunt..with regards to this specific proposition...a lack of evidence, means that they demonstrably didn't.  

We've been able to find evidence of trails used by, at most, a few dozen people over the course of centuries in the same areas that this mythical horde of hebrews is said to have wandered.  We can see these minor foot trails...from space. No evidence, however, of any exodus.

This, ofc, is just one avenue of evidence.  Genetic sampling and advances in document recovery have given us a more accurate picture of the origins of isreal and judah, and it stands in stark contrast to the establishment myth presented in the OT.  

So..no, we don;t have "all the evidence"...but we do have enough to say with certainly that you have none, and that what magic book tells you is true, simply is not and never was.

Now, the position of academics in this regard, is that exodus is not history. That certainly seems to align with the facts of the matter. More specifically, they posit that it was never intended to be history, but..rather " to demonstrate God's acts in history through Israel's bondage, salvation and covenant.". Which, I guess might sound nice, but it;s completely incoherent if there -were- none of those acts of god in that history. The text, even as a religious claim, reduces to a religious platitude.

As a narrative, all that can be drawn from it is that bondage and oppression is suffering and injustice. Well, no shit, but this was not a lesson that the jews appeared to have learned even from the story..nor their later christian contemporaries...as many west africans could have attested to a few short centuries ago...nor that modern day kkkristians seem to uniformly endorse, or that believing but non-religious apathetics manage to grasp. Even as useful fiction, it has failed at every step, and will likely fail again.