What is your god like? (7 Viewers)

[Seven]

That's a flawed way of thinking Juve_Revolution. Because there are a lot of human beings that have a brain, so it makes sense to assume Martin has one as well. Furthermore there's a lot of secondary evidence here, such as him being able to type. None of that implies that this reasoning could in any way be used to defend your theory.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[rounder]

I think you misunderstood the quote here.


"Absence of evidence does not imply evidence of absence."

I think you assumed that the bold part was 'absence of evidence', no, it it means the absence of something else, such as your brain etc..

 

[Martin]

does not imply evidence of absence.(of your brain, not evidence)

I said give me examples of "evidence of absence" since you keep pasting that quote all over the place.

 

[rounder]

That's a flawed way of thinking Juve_Revolution. Because there are a lot of human beings that have a brain, so it makes sense to assume Martin has one as well. Furthermore there's a lot of secondary evidence here, such as him being able to type. None of that implies that this reasoning could in any way be used to defend your theory.

Very well. I will give you another example.

Assume I don't know what time it is, I am sitting inside my bedroom with all the shutters closed. Now, I have no evidence at all that the sun is shining outside ( I don't feel its heat, I don't see its light etc..)


I have absolutely no evidence that the sun is shining, this still does not mean that the sun is not shining.

It's actually a very logical way of thinking if you think about it.

 

[Seven]

It is if you're agnostic. But I doubt that's the point you're trying to make.

 

[rounder]

It is if you're agnostic. But I doubt that's the point you're trying to make.

It could also be a point I am making for theism.

Atheists' reason for disbelieve in God centers on the lack of evidence for the existence of God. Yet, even if there is absolutely no evidence for the existence of God(which there is), this still does not prove that God does not exist. This is why I think if you don't believe in God, it is far more rational to claim that you are an agnostic rather than an atheist.

Martin won't agree with me here, we've already been over this a few hundred times.

The point of that was to dispute aca's quote.

 

[*aca*]

celestial tea-pot.

All we need now is someone to drop in with solipsism and we can all go to the nearest bridge & jump....

 

[Raz]

Juve Revolution, could you please say few evidence of Gods existence?

 

[Martin]

celestial tea-pot.

All we need now is someone to drop in with solipsism and we can all go to the nearest bridge & jump....

Well he keeps saying he wants me to give him evidence of absence. So I told him to show me a few examples of that. Still waiting.

 

[rounder]

Well he keeps saying he wants me to give him evidence of absence. So I told him to show me a few examples of that. Still waiting.

I have evidence of the absence of planet panucci between the moon and the earth.

Juve Revolution, could you please say few evidence of Gods existence?

Here are a few. The Origiin of the universe, the fine tuning of the initial conditions of the universe, The Moral Law, the resurrection of Jesus Christ .

 

[Raz]

Here are a few. The Origiin of the universe, the fine tuning of the initial conditions of the universe, The Moral Law, the resurrection of Jesus Christ .

How can you know the origin of the universe, to me it seems this stuff only becomes evidence when you start believing. And how is it the ressurection of Jesus is an evidence, because it`s written in bible or there are other sources i might not know, more objective ones?

 

[Martin]

I have evidence of the absence of planet panucci between the moon and the earth.

And what is this evidence?

 

[rounder]

How can you know the origin of the universe, to me it seems this stuff only becomes evidence when you start believing. And how is it the ressurection of Jesus an evidence, because it`s written in bible or there are other sources i might not know, more objective ones?

I have thoroughly explained the metaphysics of the origin of the universe, the Big Bang theory, etc.. If you go through some of my threads, you are bound to find my arguments.


There are 547 witnesses to the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Any respectable history scholar will not deny this. Among these witnesses were skeptics and enemies.

 

[rounder]

And what is this evidence?

Satelite pictures.

 

[Martin]

How can you know the origin of the universe, to me it seems this stuff only becomes evidence when you start believing.

Yes, that's just the thing. If you believe in god you see "evidence" of him everywhere. If you don't, there's no evidence to be found.

And how is it the ressurection of Jesus is an evidence, because it`s written in bible or there are other sources i might not know, more objective ones?

You don't need evidence to explain a fictional character

 

[Martin]

Satelite pictures.

Please explain.

 

[rounder]

You don't need evidence to explain a fictional character

A fictional character? I reccomend you stop watching South Park and start reading some books on history.

Please explain.

why don't you google some pcitures NASA took of the world around us, closely examine everything between the moon and the earth. If you don't find planet "panucci" then it then this is evidence against its existence.

If you're trying to flip this argument on the existence of God, it is irrelevant, since God is not natural, you do not sense Him.

 

[rounder]

Need to go see Juve now. Later.

 

[Martin]

why don't you google some pcitures NASA took of the world around us, closely examine everything between the moon and the earth. If you don't find planet "panucci" then it then this is evidence against its existence.

If you're trying to flip this argument on the existence of God, it is irrelevant, since God is not natural, you do not sense Him.

I'll set this one up in the way that you enjoy doing it.

Premise: It is possible to prove non-existence with evidence
Premise: Evidence shows absence of god
Conclusion: god does not exist

Plain and simple. In the alternate case:

Premise: Evidence cannot detect god
Premise: JuveRev tells people to give evidence for god's non-existence
Conclusion: JuveRev is guilty of self contradiction

 

[Hist]

I think what he is trying to say that if we don't have proof for something that doesn't mean its false. (or true)

Like any scientific discovery. They did not have any evidence of things (they didnt yet discover) but that doesnt mean it never existed.

In our case, i am acknowledging that Homosexuality may be genetic but you all are ignoring the cultural/psychological factors.