The pope. Popeing about.

jp_bl_68 · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:16

semi-pro waster said:
//edit...

Fair point.

What's this 'evidence' they've got? Scripture?

izzy eckerslike · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:16

Robbie G said:
...which illustrates that certain types of evidence might as well not exist, for all the good they do in proving their point. In certain scenarios, proof or lack of it is fruitless and irrelevant.

If I say that I am a deity myself and use bananas as the proof of it, it should hold equal water to anything that a Christian believes.

I believe in your bananas

Glaucus · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:18

Robbie G said:
If I say that I am a deity myself and use bananas as the proof of it, it should hold equal water to anything that a Christian believes.

Somethings are within the realms of science others are not. Science is not this all singing all dancing totally correct thing. It is man made with huge assumptions built in, it can rarely if ever prove the mechanism behind anything.
This is the problem with most posters in here, not that they question religion, but they try using science to discredit it. It does not work like that.

Castiel · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:19

semi-pro waster said:
Well no, they've advanced evidence at this point - it might be evidence that you, I, or anyone else for that matter doesn't accept as valid but it isn't necessarily something that you can disprove. If that is the situation then the logical position is simply to be agnostic about it, I'm agnostic about lots of things - often because they make no difference to my life so I can quite happily not worry about the "correctness" of them.

//edit and while we're on the subject - if a believer manages to convince a second person then in your estimation does the evidential burden suddenly move to the other side? If not then what is the threshold?

Finally someone who understands...

Glaucus · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:19

jp_bl_68 said:
Fair point.

What's this 'evidence' they've got? Scripture?

visions, personal experiences, feelings and the like.

jp_bl_68 · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:20

RDM said:
As for the Greek gods, I love em to bits, would much rather have them as a diety than the stuffy old abrahamic God.

Same here. Far more colourful tradition if you ask me.

jp_bl_68 · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:22

AcidHell2 said:
visions, personal experiences, feelings and the like.

So, anecdotal evidence, at best?

Glaucus · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:23

jp_bl_68 said:
So, anecdotal evidence, at best?

evidence that many wont accept but evidence non the less. You could hook people up to a brain monitor and show they are having a vision. But why and where from. can't be shown.

You'e talking about something out side science, so you will never have scientific evidence.

Participant · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:28

izzy eckerslike said:
I believe in your bananas

W00t! Plus one to the cause! Who else will join my legions of banana-lovers? Have faith my children.

AcidHell2 said:
Somethings are within the realms of science others are not. Science is not this all singing all dancing totally correct thing. It is man made with huge assumptions built in, it can rarely if ever prove the mechanism behind anything.
This is the problem with most posters in here, not that they question religion, but they try using science to discredit it. It does not work like that.

Yes, but I don't have 'faith' in science either, I just find it a more likely explanation.

:confused:

AcidHell2 said:
visions, personal experiences, feelings and the like.

LMFAO

izzy eckerslike · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:32

God has never left any physical evidence of his existence on earth.

None of the miracles of Jesus' left any physical evidence either.
God has never spoken to modern man, for example by taking over all the television stations and broadcasting a rational message to everyone.

The resurrected Jesus has never appeared to anyone.

The Bible we have is provably incorrect and is obviously the work of primitive men rather than God.

When we analyze prayer with statistics, we find no evidence that God is answering prayers

Huge, amazing atrocities like the Holocaust and AIDS occur without any response from God.

Glaucus · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:36

Why would a dirty have or need to gist or expose themself to man.

Again why and how would a deity awnser prayers assuming he had given us free will.

Nothing you have said shows or proves anything.

Participant · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:39

AcidHell2 said:
Why would a dirty have or need to gist or expose themself to man.

Again why and how would a deity awnser prayers assuming he had given us free will.

Nothing you have said shows or proves anything.

If I make something up at random, please can you explain where the burden of proof should lie? Please can you confront my banana theory? I have one believer so prove that bananas are not proof for me being a diety.

izzy eckerslike · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:40

Robbie G said:
W00t! Plus one to the cause! Who else will join my legions of banana-lovers? Have faith my children

Well your bananas can be viewed & fully examined and they are indeed actual proof of the supernatural & not just hearsay like other religions so I declare my undying faith to your bananas.

Glaucus · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:42

Burden of prove does not need to lie with anyone, that's the thing many of you get confused by.
You claim to be a deity, so what, who does it affect and why does anyone have to prove it either way.

As said before just because something had not been seen before doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Participant · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:43

AcidHell2 said:
Burden of prove does not need to lie with anyone, that's the thing many of you get confused by.
You claim to be a deity, so what, who does it affect and why does anyone have to prove it either way.

As said before just because something had not been seen before doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Therefore I could be a deity.

Thank you.

Glaucus · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:43

Burden of prove does not need to lie with anyone, that's the thing many of you get confused by.
You claim to be a deity, so what, who does it affect and why does anyone have to prove it either way.

As said before just because something had not been seen before doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Glaucus · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:46

Robbie G said:
Therefore I could be a deity.

Thank you.

Thank you? For what.
Prove in the sense you want is only relevant for theories based on the scientific principle. Which again is based on massive assumptions.
Anything is possible, don't see why you think it is some victory. The only thing that matters outside of science is the individuals beliefs and benchmarks.

izzy eckerslike · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:51

AcidHell2 said:
Why would a dirty have or need to gist or expose themself to man.

Again why and how would a deity awnser prayers assuming he had given us free will.

Nothing you have said shows or proves anything.

I just posted some random facts, there are probably a thousand more to discredit the bible stories etc.

Fact or fiction: Moses led the Jews to the promised land & wandered for 40 years

The Book of Exodus, supported by the Book of Numbers says that Moses led 600,000 fighting men from Egypt. This is considered to mean approximately 2.5 million men, women and children.

Archeological fact:

Not one single trace has ever been found to support the story, a huge number of people spend 40 years wandering around but leave no trace?

Glaucus · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:54

That does not disprove a deity, it doesn't even disprove Christianity, as you have to know where each book came from and how it was assembled.
Also history is sometimes lost for ever and new history is being in earthward every day.

izzy eckerslike · 21 Sep 2010 at 20:58

AcidHell2 said:
That does not disprove a deity, it doesn't even disprove Christianity, as you have to know where each book came from and how it was assembled.
Also history is sometimes lost for ever and new history is being in earthward every day.

It does however help disprove the bible as a source of historical facts does it not ?