Subduction Zone
Regular Member
How many Christians forget the null hypothesis and the fact that the burden of proof is upon them?
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Really? He was a truly amazing man:
The Incredible Kim Jong-il and his Amazing Achievements - Telegraph
Of course we don't want to talk about what happened if you did not worship him properly.
horrace99 said:And there is NO NADA ZIP 0 evidence against Christianity or the supernatural so your lying.
There is NO NADA ZIP 0 evidence against Islam. Praise Allah!
Would you believe that a person existed if the earliest records of them came from several decades after the time they are said to have died? Especially when the claims being made are as extraordinary as those being made of Jesus?
I know I wouldn't.
The main thing to remember as well, is that there is NO NADA ZIP 0 evidence in favour of Christianity or the Supernatural either.
Even with a complete lack of evidence against, you still can't assert a truth claim until you have sufficient evidence for your actual claim.
Now of course, there's plenty of evidence against Christianity, however my bet is the Christians on this thread will simply dishonestly evade it like usual.
seeking Christ said:Unbelievable the way you dismiss everything academia has to say when it doesn't suit you.
Creationist strategy. You just forfeited your right to complain when they employ it.
and the end of a quoted section and aTN, sort out your quote tags, please. Use the
at the beginning of the next one.
I'm on a cell phone not a computer. I don't have the same options on my phone as computer users do . Sorry if this is an issue.
What program are you using on the phone
Mine allows full editing of text while on the phone.
What program are you using on the phone
Mine allows full editing of text while on the phone.
Hmmm I'm not sure maybe because the apologetics section is for Christians only.And there is NO NADA ZIP 0 evidence against Christianity or the supernatural so your lying.
and most atheists on here were Christians when they joined.
And why exactly do you want people to be atheists
If you're an atheist, that is, of course, your right. Whether you just don't like the Abrahamic God, or you think the idea of a creator is bunk, that's all well and good. I'm convinced that God is real. Moreover, I'm convinced that Jesus was a zombie and that he was God Incarnate. I've given my beliefs a great deal of examination and went through a period where I was an atheist. Most atheists I know have no problem with that.
I do know some atheists, though, and I know a lot of atheists on this forum, who have a problem with blind faith in God. I have to ask, why? Why would you try to 'convert' someone to atheism? I'm not trying to shut you up, I'm genuinely curious. From a theistic standpoint, conversion makes sense, because there is a benefit to those who know and believe the truth, and therefore a moral imperative on the part of believers to spread it. What does an atheist get out of spreading atheism?
Religion helps many people get through their daily struggles. It helps those who would otherwise give in to existentialism or despair find purpose. It comforts the grieving in a way that pure science tends not to.
What possible purpose is there for convincing someone God isn't real?
Even if you were correct (which I don't believe, but let's pretend), at best you would be like a playground bully who tells another kid that his imaginary friend isn't real. Being correct doesn't make that a good thing to do, and it certainly doesn't make it a nice thing to do. Moreover, convincing someone God isn't real doesn't have any of the benefits of dissuading someone from believing in an imaginary friend. You can't function in society while talking about your imaginary friend; you can while talking about God. Eventually, at some early point in life, a schoolboy will learn that his friend is not real, and you could make the argument that the earlier, the better. That is not true of religion. It is not inevitable, or even particularly likely, that a given man will "grow out of" his religion.
And why should he? As I said before, it gives one solace and comfort. Why try to take that away from him?
EDIT: No, it wasn't a good post. It was a crappy post. I was tired, and existential, and wasn't thinking straight. Un-rep it, please.
How many Christians forget the null hypothesis and the fact that the burden of proof is upon them?
No, we don't forget that SubZone. If we do, there are plenty to remind us. Of course, I'm also sure the strong atheists know they have a burden of proof as well.
To be an atheist requires an indefinitely greater measure of faith than to receive all the great truths which atheism would deny. - Joseph Addison[FONT='Corbel','sans-serif'][/FONT]
muichimotsu said:Problem is this assumes that atheism has a problem with truth, which is hardly the case. And also presupposes that faith in the sense of belief without evidence or even belief in spite of evidence to the contrary is something ideal or a point of comparison between systems to show which is superior by who has more or less. Though if Christianity's own principle about faith is right, wouldn't that still make atheists right if this were true, since Jesus admired those who have faith and have not seen?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?