If God were real, you wouldn’t need a book

[ZenMode]

You are a mental cripple, Zen.

AS I HAVE SAID DOZENS OF TIMES NOW...AND REPEATED IN MY LAST POST...WE ARE NOT DISCUSSING THE FACT THAT YOU DO NOT "BELIEVE" ANY GODS EXIST.

I ALSO DO NOT "BELIEVE" ANY GODS EXIST.

BUT YOU "BELIEVE" THERE ARE NO GODS.

AND THAT "BELIEF" IS NOTHING MORE THAN A BLIND GUESS.

I, ON THE OTHER HAND, DO NOT "BELIEVE" THERE ARE NO GODS...

...AND I ALSO DO NOT "BELIEVE" THERE ARE NO GODS.

NOT SURE WHAT IT TAKES TO FINALLY GET THAT THROUGH YOU SKULL, BUT I WILL KEEP DRILLING.

The problem is that you treat the existence of God's in the same way you would treat the flip of a coin, where it truly is a blind guess whether it would be heads or tales.

When there is evidence one way or the other, I don't see it as a blind guess. I see it as a reasoned opinion.

A belief in Santa, given the evidence, isn't a blind guess, IMO, but I don't see how you could see it as anything but a blind guess.

 

[Ross Dolan]

The problem is that you treat the existence of God's in the same way you would treat the flip of a coin, where it truly is a blind guess whether it would be heads or tales.

That is exactly what it is...a blind guess that could be arrived at just as easily and logically by a coin toss. Did you designate "head" as "there are no gods"...or as "there is a god?"

When there is evidence one way or the other, I don't see it as a blind guess.

When there is unambiguous evidence one way or the other...neither do I.

I see it as a reasoned opinion.

So do I.

Unfortunately, there is no unambiguous evidence in either direction. That does not stop people from guessing "Yes" or "no" to the question "Is there at least one god?"

That is what you are doing...making a blind guess.

It may be correct...or it may be incorrect.

Can't help but wonder which it is.

A belief in Santa, given the evidence, isn't a blind guess, IMO, but I don't see how you could see it as anything but a blind guess.

Well, that has to do with your ability to think...and see.

If you want to think that the evidence about the existence of Santa Claus is the same as the evidence for the true nature of the REALITY of existence...fine with me. I love a good laugh.

 

[Monad Portal]

I am a proud advocate for satin. My wife has a couple of things she tells me are satin...and I love them.

yes you love satan.

 

[Monad Portal]

The problem is that you treat the existence of God's in the same way you would treat the flip of a coin, where it truly is a blind guess whether it would be heads or tales.

When there is evidence one way or the other, I don't see it as a blind guess. I see it as a reasoned opinion.

A belief in Santa, given the evidence, isn't a blind guess, IMO, but I don't see how you could see it as anything but a blind guess.

the churchy satanists want to expand their cult.

but they don;t want to talk about actual morality.

 

[gfm7175]

If the Bible is full of fictitious events and fictitious people, why believe that the god described in the Bible is real?

If the Bible is full of real events and real people, why believe that the God described in the Bible is fictitious?

The Bible isn't a high school assignment. It's a book that a) many people believe is literally true, including what you write off as hyperbole or metaphor

There are numerous literary styles utilized in the Bible. Some parts are literal, some parts are metaphors, some parts are symbolism, etc etc... Context matters.

and b) believers use as the basis for structuring their lives.

Yup. The Bible is a very good book to use to structure one's life. There's a lot of wisdom throughout it.

If you are writing off the miraculous events in the Bible, which are the basis for God and divine Jesus, why believe there is a god?

I'm not the one writing off the miraculous events.

 

[ZenMode]

Well, that has to do with your ability to think...and see.

If you want to think that the evidence about the existence of Santa Claus is the same as the evidence for the true nature of the REALITY of existence...fine with me. I love a good laugh.

What evidence exists FOR gods that doesn't exist FOR Santa?

 

[Monad Portal]

If the Bible is full of real events and real people, why believe that the God described in the Bible is fictitious?

There are numerous literary styles utilized in the Bible. Some parts are literal, some parts are metaphors, some parts are symbolism, etc etc... Context matters.

Yup. The Bible is a very good book to use to structure one's life. There's a lot of wisdom throughout it.

I'm not the one writing off the miraculous events.

all you need is the golden rule.

throw the racism away.

 

[Ross Dolan]

What evidence exists FOR gods that doesn't exist FOR Santa?

I give up. What?

 

[ZenMode]

I give up. What?

I'm asking you.

 

[ZenMode]

If the Bible is full of real events and real people, why believe that the God described in the Bible is fictitious?

God didn't describe anything in the Bible because neither God nor Jesus wrote the Bible.

 

[Monad Portal]

I give up. What?

its a real question for you, stupid.

its not a riddle.

 

[Margot]

all you need is the golden rule.

throw the racism away.

Salvation doesn't come from the Golden rule

 

[Taichiliberal]

I wonder what that's supposed to mean?

Think about it .... a planet of creatures who are constantly competing and fighting among themselves, who invent all types of contentions and things to be angry about. Who kill for religious differences, have serious sexual problems and are constantly destroying the environment they depend to live on.

And all in different ethnic colors.

Good times.

 

[Margot]

Think about it .... a planet of creatures who are constantly competing and fighting among themselves, who invent all types of contentions and things to be angry about. Who kill for religious differences, have serious sexual problems and are constantly destroying the environment they depend to live on.

And all in different ethnic colors.

Good times.

Kicks keep getting harder to find!

 

[Monad Portal]

Salvation doesn't come from the Golden rule

practicing the golden rule is the whole of the law.

 

[Ross Dolan]

I'm asking you.

Okay. I thought it was a trick question.

Anyway...what difference would it make?

I couldn't care less about what evidence exists FOR gods or Santa.

I am talking about YOUR ASSERTION that no gods exist.

What evidence exists that no gods exist?

 

[ZenMode]

What evidence exists that no gods exist?

I don't even know what that means. What evidence exists that no unicorns exist or no Santa Clause exists or no Leprechauns exist?

 

[Ross Dolan]

I don't even know what that means. What evidence exists that no unicorns exist or no Santa Clause exists or no Leprechauns exist?

You have asserted that there are no gods. A burden of proof for that assertion accrues to you.

So...what evidence exists that there are no gods?

 

[ZenMode]

So...what evidence exists that there are no gods?

I know what you said, but how would anyone provide evidence against the existence of something? Generally people make affirmative claims; something EXISTS or something is TRUE and we make them prove it. Leprechauns EXIST or unicorns EXIST or the Zeus exists. Ok..prove it. We don't do the opposite.

How would you provide evidence that something doesn't exist? Give me an example.

 

[Ross Dolan]

I know what you said, but how would anyone provide evidence against the existence of something?

Beat the shit out of me. That is why I consider assertions that there are no gods to be stupid...and would never make the assertion.

BUT...you have made that assertion...and in debate, you have incurred the burden of proof.

SO WHERE IS IT?

Generally people make affirmative claims; something EXISTS or something is TRUE and we make them prove it.

Yup. And asking them to prove it makes sense, because anyone making an assertion bears that burden.

Leprechauns EXIST or unicorns EXIST or the Zeus exists. Ok..prove it. We don't do the opposite.

No, because you think you can make assertions without providing proof.

Okay...you are wrong, but don't let that stop you. But just realize you are doing what you accuse the religionists of doing...making claims you cannot back up.

Boy, the world would be a lot more logical without theistic and atheistic blind guesses...which end up being assertions.

How would you provide evidence that something doesn't exist? Give me an example.

Can't. That is why I am not stupid enough to make those kinds of assertions.

BUT you have. So...provide the proof. The burden falls on you...so once again: Provide the proof.