Christianity and the Burden of Proof

[ToddNotTodd]

Then read the label yourself. LOL

Except you see the label as saying one thing. Person B sees it as saying another thing. And the non believer sees no label at all.

And we're back where we started.

 

[bhsmte]

Yes, I can't help but notice the number of times posts contain claims that other people are not intelligent enough to understand the discussion. That's not a sign of a strong argument.

Very predictable though.

 

[Uber Genius]

If there is no agreeable and adequate proof of evidence to support a claim, the claim is considered an argument from ignorance.[

Wikipedia has a wide range in quality of content

Plato.org (Stanford) and internet encyclopedia of philosophy (Tennessee) have much higher quality of scholarship.

We have knowledge claims all the time in every field of knowledge. Some fields are easier that others to marshall marshall evidence.

Generally when one makes a claim, one backs up that claim (justifies). If I claim "There is no God," it is the same type of claim as the number of gum balls in a jar are odd.
I would need o give evidence.

Now here is the "New Atheist" trick. "Just make the claim negative and it is no longer a claim!" Now even a high school student can figure out that this is a foolish claim!

"The number of gum balls in the jar are NOT even" turns out to be the same claim as, "The number of gum balls in the jar ARE odd!"

Now the next time an atheist says they have no beliefs in God and therefore don't have the burden of proof you can just negate your theistic claims. "Well, I don't have a lack of beliefs in God. Therefore, I don't have the burden of proof."

All claims, positive or negative, need justification to be considered knowledge claims. Atheists have some good justification and so do theists. Avoiding engaging the justification is just arrogance and laziness not knowledge.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Now the next times wine says as an atheist they have no beliefs in God and their fore don't have the burden of proof you can just negate your theistic claims. "Well, I don't have a lack of beliefs in God. Therefore, I. Don't have the burden of proof."

Neither "I disbelieve theistic claims" and "I believe a god exists" are claims about external reality. They only speak to the claimant's state of mind. Neither has a burden of proof, unless you want to assert that the person could be lying about what they believe, in which case the proof still wouldn't address the external reality of a god, but rather what the claimant actually believes.

All claims, positive or negative, need justification to be considered knowledge claims. Atheists have some good justification and so do theists. Avoiding engaging the justification is just arrogance and laziness not knowledge.

If an atheist claims "No gods exist", they have a burden of proof. If an atheist says "I disbelieve theistic claims", then they do not.

If a theist claims "A god exists", they have a burden of proof. If a theist claims "I believe a god exists", they do not.

See the difference?

 

[HitchSlap]

Just out of curiosity, who hear is familiar with the term, "ubiquitous consent"? I've never heard of it, myself.

 

[AV1611VET]

Just out of curiosity, who hear is familiar with the term, "ubiquitous consent"? I've never heard of it, myself.

Not I.

 

[Dave Ellis]

In the case of Christianity, the jar of gumballs comes with a label on it that says: CONTAINS AN EVEN NUMBER OF GUMBALLS.

Failure to believe that is an argument from foolishness: and a fallacy of fools.

The label still doesn't really provide any evidence for whether there's an even number in the jar. The guy in the example who thought there's an even number without evidence could be the same guy who put the label on the jar.

 

[AV1611VET]

The label still doesn't really provide any evidence for whether there's an even number in the jar. The guy in the example who thought there's an even number without evidence could be the same guy who put the label on the jar.

And we could come up with 1,000,000 scenarios to refute each claim, couldn't we?

Anything to insure the burden of proof is on Christianity, I suppose.

But when it's all said and done, God is not going to accept anyone claiming it could have been a false label, or they didn't know if they were odd or even ... or any of the other 999,998 excuses.

And if God isn't going to buy it, I'm not either.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

And we could come up with 1,000,000 scenarios to refute each claim, couldn't we?

Anything to insure the burden of proof is on Christianity, I suppose.

But when it's all said and done, God is not going to accept anyone claiming it could have been a false label, or they didn't know if they were odd or even ... or any of the other 999,998 excuses.

And if God isn't going to buy it, I'm not either.

If you show that a god exists, I may consider what you've written as more than just talk.

 

[Dave Ellis]

And we could come up with 1,000,000 scenarios to refute each claim, couldn't we?

Do you disagree that things are sometimes mislabeled?

Anything to insure the burden of proof is on Christianity, I suppose.

Because the burden of proof is on Christianity when it makes claims about how things work.

But when it's all said and done, God is not going to accept anyone claiming it could have been a false label, or they didn't know if they were odd or even ... or any of the other 999,998 excuses.

And if God isn't going to buy it, I'm not either.

Why did god make us forgo logic and reason in order to accept him, and Christianity as true? It seems rather bizarre and cruel that he'd punish us for using the brains he gave us properly.

 

[AV1611VET]

If you show that a god exists, I may consider what you've written as more than just talk.

What year is it? BC or AD?

And if you want more than just talk, how about those who died for the cause of Christ? or those who built magnificent edifices to worship Him in?

And do you just talk about Christian holidays? or do you celebrate them? time off? extra pay if you work on those days?

Is that just talk?

How about bumper stickers, songs, debates, literature, the Ten Commandments that unbelievers now want out of public view, IN GOD WE TRUST on our money, UNDER GOD in our Pledge of Allegiance?

What about our missionaries who give up their creature comforts to go out on the mission field and hazard their lives to fulfill the Great Commission?

Just lip service?

And what about the fact that every single Christian ... past, present, and future ... believes: IN THE BEGINNING, GOD?

And for the record, what about all those other religions ... including the cults ... that believe in a god? even going so far as to kill themselves or marching off on Crusades or whatnot?

Just lip service ... or walking their talk?

Did you know that Shoko Asahara didn't just want to pay Shakti lip service? He wanted to walk his talk in worshipping the god of destruction, so he gassed subways in Tokyo with sarin nerve gas.

You call yourself a SEEKER. What is it you're seeking?

The god of Islam, with his convert-or-die philosophy? or the God who died on the Cross to redeem us from our sins, with His love-thine-enemy message? or maybe someone in between?

Just asking.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why did god make us forgo logic and reason in order to accept him, and Christianity as true?

Because He doesn't want your brain; He wants your heart.

Romans 10:10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

What year is it? BC or AD?

And if you want more than just talk, how about those who died for the cause of Christ? or those who built magnificent edifices to worship Him in?

And do you just talk about Christian holidays? or do you celebrate them? time off? extra pay if you work on those days?

Is that just talk?

How about bumper stickers, songs, debates, literature, the Ten Commandments that unbelievers now want out of public view, IN GOD WE TRUST on our money, UNDER GOD in our Pledge of Allegiance?

What about our missionaries who give up their creature comforts to go out on the mission field and hazard their lives to fulfill the Great Commission?

Just lip service?

And what about the fact that every single Christian ... past, present, and future ... believes: IN THE BEGINNING, GOD?

And for the record, what about all those other religions ... including the cults ... that believe in a god? even going so far as to kill themselves or marching off on Crusades or whatnot?

Just lip service ... or walking their talk?

Did you know that Shoko Asahara didn't just want to pay Shakti lip service? He wanted to walk his talk in worshipping the god of destruction, so he gassed subways in Tokyo with sarin nerve gas.

You call yourself a SEEKER. What is it you're seeking?

The god of Islam, with his convert-or-die philosophy? or the God who died on the Cross to redeem us from our sins, with His love-thine-enemy message? or maybe someone in between?

Just asking.

Do you believe that anything you've written necessarily points to an existent god? Because all I'm seeing are examples of human beings who believe in a god, not evidence of any god.

 

[Dave Ellis]

What year is it? BC or AD?

2017 CE

And if you want more than just talk, how about those who died for the cause of Christ? or those who built magnificent edifices to worship Him in?

What about those who died for Joseph Smith? We can actually verify with 100% accuracy that he existed, and that many early Mormons died for him. Does that make Joseph Smith a real prophet?

Dying for something means that those people strongly believed it. That provides no evidence that their beliefs were true.

Mormons have big temples and lots of money as well.

And do you just talk about Christian holidays? or do you celebrate them? time off? extra pay if you work on those days?

Is that just talk?

I don't celebrate the religious aspect of Christian holidays. I'll take the day off though and get together with family.

How about bumper stickers, songs, debates, literature, the Ten Commandments that unbelievers now want out of public view, IN GOD WE TRUST on our money, UNDER GOD in our Pledge of Allegiance?

Those things are just talk

What about our missionaries who give up their creature comforts to go out on the mission field and hazard their lives to fulfill the Great Commission?

Just lip service?

Yeah, pretty much. I'm sure they believe in what they are doing, but I don't think their core beliefs are accurate.

And what about the fact that every single Christian ... past, present, and future ... believes: IN THE BEGINNING, GOD?

Irrelevant

And for the record, what about all those other religions ... including the cults ... that believe in a god? even going so far as to kill themselves or marching off on Crusades or whatnot?

Just lip service ... or walking their talk?

Both I guess. However, if Muslims die for Mohammad and Mormons die for Joseph Smith and you don't believe their religions are true, then why are you compelled by the fact that Christians died for Jesus?

Did you know that Shoko Asahara didn't just want to pay Shakti lip service? He wanted to walk his talk in worshipping the god of destruction, so he gassed subways in Tokyo with sarin nerve gas.

And he's a loony who should be locked up. This should be all the evidence that you need that strong belief does not equal truth.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Because He doesn't want your brain; He wants your heart.

Romans 10:10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

We don't think with our hearts, we think with our brains.

 

[Uber Genius]

If an atheist claims "No gods exist", they have a burden of proof. If an atheist says "I disbelieve theistic claims", then they do not.

So my couch is an atheist? Not to mention all mathematical and other abstract objects? My cat is an atheist. Not to mention all babies. Even those claiming to be agnostics now, on your definition, become atheists.

See the difference? And why educated people don't waste their money on books by New Atheists.

However i do recommend J. H. Sobel, Graham Oppy, Michael Ruse, Antony Flew, and Quinten Smith to my atheist friends. They do an excellent job defending the positive claim of atheism while joining me calling New Atheists philosophically naïve.

 

[AV1611VET]

Do you believe that anything you've written necessarily points to an existent god? Because all I'm seeing are examples of human beings who believe in a god, not evidence of any god.

 

[zippy2006]

How many times does this have to be explained to you? You can not accept something as true by saying "I don't know". You don't have to take up a contradictory position on the matter to not accept a claim.

Saying "I don't know" is not the same as disputing something. Not accepting something is not the same as disputing something. You're equivocating left and right.

Again, no. There's two positions one can take on a given proposal, "A" or "Not A", those are actual logical negations. If you disagree with "A", that means you currently have not been convinced, and you have to rely on the default position of "not A". The problem is you are mistaking "not A" with "claim B", and they aren't the same thing.

That's right, you "rely" on the position of "Not A." When you dispute X, you take up the position of "Not X."

To dispute is to argue, to debate, to disagree, to gainsay, to be against, to contradict. It is to say "Not A." You can't dispute something and agree with it at the same time, and the most general form of disagreement is the contradictory opposite, the "Not A."

 

[AV1611VET]

What about those who died for Joseph Smith?

Name me one person who died for Joseph Smith.

And even if he did have body guards, they walked their talk, didn't they?

Both I guess. However, if Muslims die for Mohammad and Mormons die for Joseph Smith and you don't believe their religions are true, then why are you compelled by the fact that Christians died for Jesus?

I don't care if little Suzie died for Mickey Mouse.

Don't tell me little Suzie didn't just pay Mickey Mouse lip service and expect me to believe it.

And he's a loony who should be locked up. This should be all the evidence that you need that strong belief does not equal truth.

Dave ... you're an atheist, are you not?

Let's start with first things first and get you believing in [a] god(s) ... then we'll work on which one is the right one.

But first we need to get that atheism out of you.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Is there accompanying text to go along with your unhelpful emoji?