What Convinced you God Exists?

[Clizby WampusCat]

Do you seriously only believe through epistemology? I shouldn't think you had enough hours in the day to get along that way!

What do you think epistemology is?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Hmm. Then can I assume you don't think the First Amendment wants all religion out of state matters? I.e. that no mention or use of any religion should be not only respected, but permitted, in government?

No. I believe the first amendment allows for people to practice a religion without retribution from the government as long as it does not infringe on another persons rights. So practically politicians or government employees can believe, practice, pray etc. all they want. But they cannot use the machinery of the government at any level to promote their particular religion. So a governor cannot preach the gospel in an official speech or we cannot pray to a god at football games using public announcing systems without allowing all prayers to all gods using that system. Any kid or government employee can pray all they want but they cannot force others to participate or use governmental property equipment tp promote a particular religion.

 

[Paulomycin]

Where did I ever say theism is a non-issue?

Why do I have to remind you that you're an atheist?

I like talking about these things,

"Entertainment."

I want to know other peoples views, I always learn something in the discussions,

You "learn" new ways to push your confirmation bias and it amuses you.

If God exists I want to know so maybe there is good evidence out there. Until I get that evidence I cannot make myself believe.

Stop suppressing evidence and you'll make some real progress for a change.

 

[Paulomycin]

Why?

Because you can't account for your claim. To you, it just happens. Like magic.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Why do I have to remind you that you're an atheist?



"Entertainment."



You "learn" new ways to push your confirmation bias and it amuses you.



Stop suppressing evidence and you'll make some real progress for a change.

Just stop. I explained these things to you. If you are not going to believe me then just say that.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Because you can't account for your claim. To you, it just happens. Like magic.

Again just stop. I may not know what started/created the universe I have never claimed it is magic. I don't know.

 

[HitchSlap]

Again just stop. I may not know what started/created the universe I have never claimed it is magic. I don't know.

He's a presuppositionalist Poe, better left on ignore.

 

[Paulomycin]

Again just stop. I may not know what started/created the universe I have never claimed it is magic. I don't know.

"I don't know" is not a substitute for the actual answer.

"Appeal to ignorance - the claim that whatever has not been proven false must be true, and vice versa. (e.g., There is no compelling evidence that UFOs are not visiting the Earth; therefore, UFOs exist, and there is intelligent life elsewhere in the Universe. Or: There may be seventy kazillion other worlds, but not one is known to have the moral advancement of the Earth, so we're still central to the Universe.) This impatience with ambiguity can be criticized in the phrase: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." -Carl Sagan​

 

[Paulomycin]

He's a presuppositionalist Poe, better left on ignore.

Poes are where you can't tell if they're real or trolling. I'm the real-deal. You wish I was a Poe. It'd be much easier to dismiss.

 

[Paulomycin]

He's a presuppositionalist Poe, better left on ignore.

Do you even know the difference between Natural Theology and Presuppositionalism?

 

[HitchSlap]

Poes are where you can't tell if they're real or trolling. I'm the real-deal. You wish I was a Poe. It'd be much easier to dismiss.

Maybe you do know the meaning of irony.

 

[HitchSlap]

Do you even know the difference between Natural Theology and Presuppositionalism?

Yep, one makes poop up, the other assumes the former is true.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

"I don't know" is not a substitute for the actual answer.

"Appeal to ignorance - the claim that whatever has not been proven false must be true, and vice versa. (e.g., There is no compelling evidence that UFOs are not visiting the Earth; therefore, UFOs exist, and there is intelligent life elsewhere in the Universe. Or: There may be seventy kazillion other worlds, but not one is known to have the moral advancement of the Earth, so we're still central to the Universe.) This impatience with ambiguity can be criticized in the phrase: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." -Carl Sagan​

Are you for real? You don't even understand what the appeal to ignorance fallacy is. My answer is "I don't know what caused the universe". That is not a fallacy. Read the definition again and tell me why it is not a fallacy.

 

[Paulomycin]

Yep, one makes poop up, the other assumes the former is true.

You're missing details. Again. This is getting to be a recurring pattern.

 

[Paulomycin]

Are you for real? You don't even understand what the appeal to ignorance fallacy is. My answer is "I don't know what caused the universe". That is not a fallacy. Read the definition again and tell me why it is not a fallacy.

Then "I don't know" has nothing to do with your position at all. You're either using it as an argument or not. I'm okay if you're not using it as an argument.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Then "I don't know" has nothing to do with your position at all. You're either using it as an argument or not. I'm okay if you're not using it as an argument.

I don't know is my position. Because I don't know how the universe was created/formed/came about etc.

 

[Paulomycin]

I don't know is my position. Because I don't know how the universe was created/formed/came about etc.

Oh. So you are using it as an argument.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Oh. So you are using it as an argument.

I am telling you I don't know. I am not making any claim. I am not convinced by any evidence I have seen what the answer is. How is this hard to understand? It is not a fallacy it is an honest answer to the question.

 

[HitchSlap]

Oh. So you are using it as an argument.

What makes your creation myth better than any other?

 

[Paulomycin]

I am telling you I don't know. I am not making any claim. I am not convinced by any evidence I have seen what the answer is. How is this hard to understand? It is not a fallacy it is an honest answer to the question.

You literally said that it was your position. You're obviously not trying to know. Because everything has to be filtered through your presupposed confirmation bias of atheism.