Burden of Proof VS Presumption of Innocence

[joinfree]

No.

Not accepting a claim is not the same as stating it is wrong.

Suppose you have a sealed jar of coins. And you make the claim "There is an even number of coins in the jar".

I say "I don't accept your claim, show me you're right".

This is not saying you're wrong. This is not saying there is an odd number of coins. This is merely saying that I don't believe your claim until you can demonstrate it to me.

The kind editor says: "you have no reasons to say, what the number is even, have you? No, I have not, it is just a wild guess. So, you have no proof, what the number is even? Yes, I have no proof. Sorry, but our journal needs proofs. But also a hypothesis is suitable, however your text does not contribute any new thing to the science, does it? No, it does not. Good bye."

 

[joinfree]

I just told you that these aliens said that all religions are false and that the founders of those religions considered them angels and gods.

So, do you believe my claim?

Also: argument by youtube. Excellent.

Mine Church is proven, so the "aliens" have sinned against the Presumption of Innocence by groundlessly denying the proofs.

 

[joinfree]

Atheism is a single position on a single issue and it has no content whatsoever that even can be "true" or "false".

The false atheism is a way of living. A way of living can be self-destructive, thus, wrong before mine God.

 

[DogmaHunter]

The false atheism is a way of living. A way of living can be self-destructive, thus, wrong before mine God.

Is not believing in bigfoot a "way of living"?

 

[Belk]

The false atheism is a way of living. A way of living can be self-destructive, thus, wrong before mine God.

No, it is not. Why should I listen to you if you get something so basic incorrect?

 

[joinfree]

Is not believing in bigfoot a "way of living"?

Yes, it says many about the human: 1) he ignores the observations, thus he is like a false atheist, 2) he ignores the possibility of wonder. The Faith is Faithfulness to Knowledge, so one can not yet believe in absence of B.

 

[joinfree]

No, it is not. Why should I listen to you if you get something so basic incorrect?

Then the False Atheism is the total Nothing. Do not follow the da*n thing.

 

[Paulos23]

Then the False Atheism is the total Nothing. Do not follow the da*n thing.

And why is that a bad thing? That alone doesn't make the Atheist a bad person. In fact many Atheists are good law abiding citizens. Many of us give to charity or are just nice people. There are those that are not nice, but that is true of any group of people.

And it is not like they haven't looked at religions and deities. Many have (like I have) and have not seen much to support the claim of a deity, much less the claims of individual religions and their sects.

You making the claim of your God existing with little evidence does not help either. You are making a claim and and acting under umbrage when anyone points out you need to show evidence or that the evidence you have given doesn't show existence of a god.

I don't care what you believe, but if you want others to believe it, you need to give good evidence that is independently verifiable.

Otherwise you are just shouting and causing wind.

 

[Belk]

Then the False Atheism is the total Nothing. Do not follow the da*n thing.

No, that is not correct either. Perhaps you should learn what atheism is prior to trying to talk against it?

 

[DogmaHunter]

Yes, it says many about the human: 1) he ignores the observations, thus he is like a false atheist, 2) he ignores the possibility of wonder. The Faith is Faithfulness to Knowledge, so one can not yet believe in absence of B.

So, you believe in bigfoot, alien abductions, reptilians from outer space, leprechauns,... and just about any other fantastical claims that humans have ever uttered?

 

[DogmaHunter]

Then the False Atheism is the total Nothing. Do not follow the da*n thing.

One doesn't "follow" atheism.

One follows theism or one doesn't follow theism. Not following theism, is called atheism.

There is nothing in atheism to "follow".

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Mine Church is proven, so the "aliens" have sinned against the Presumption of Innocence by groundlessly denying the proofs.

Finding the evidence unconvincing is a sin now? Meh.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

...The Faith is Faithfulness to Knowledge, so one can not yet believe in absence of B.

Believing in the absence of something is different from not believing in the presence of something.

 

[joinfree]

.....
There is nothing in atheism to "follow".

There is "Nothingness" in the false atheism to follow. LOL.

 

[DogmaHunter]

There is "Nothingness" in the false atheism to follow. LOL.

You can lol all you want.
It won't change the fact that there is nothing in atheism to follow or believe.

You don't need to "follow" or "believe" something to be an atheist.
Theism is the thing that requires beliefs and followers.
Not believing or following theism, is what we call atheism.

 

[joinfree]

You can lol all you want.
It won't change the fact that there is nothing in atheism to follow or believe.

You don't need to "follow" or "believe" something to be an atheist.
Theism is the thing that requires beliefs and followers.
Not believing or following theism, is what we call atheism.

I repeat: the false atheism is the following the Nothing (Nihilo). The following the idol called "death of God". It is Nihilism - the worship the Nihilo as God.

 

[DogmaHunter]

I repeat: the false atheism is the following the Nothing (Nihilo). The following the idol called "death of God". It is Nihilism - the worship the Nihilo as God.

No, nihilism and atheism aren't the same thing either.

It seems you are having serious problems with the concept of unbelief.
"not believing x" is not a belief.

Just like
- "not playing football" is not a sport.
- "barefoot" is not a type of shoe
- "not collecting stamps" is not a hobby
- "bald" is not a hairstyle
- "off" is not a tv channel
- "naked" is not a piece of clothing
- ...

 

[quatona]

I repeat: the false atheism is the following the Nothing (Nihilo).

Yeah, that would be the false atheism alright.
Now let´s talk about actual atheism.

 

[joinfree]

Yeah, that would be the false atheism alright.
Now let´s talk about actual atheism.

So, the false atheism follows Something?

 

[quatona]

So, the false atheism follows Something?

The "false atheism" is your invention, and you defined it as "following Nothingness".
Now, once you are ready to talk about actual atheism, I might be able to help you with understanding it.