Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Spaz · 05-04-2003, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Radorth

...fairy-tale gods...

Jesus never existed.

If God exists he would be a murderer.

Glad to hear a couple of you are really borderline agnostics. However speaking and acting as if there is no God, or he is so bad as to be unworthy of recognition is to me the same as "knowing" there is no God.

Those 3 examples seem to hinge on particular beliefs, which aren't the issue. Agnostics and "weak" atheists would agree that these certain gods are not real, but as to the question if there is or is not a god one would have to say they didn't know. I can say right now that the christian god is not real, but that does not mean that I'm saying there is no god.

Starboy · 05-04-2003, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spaz
Those 3 examples seem to hinge on particular beliefs, which aren't the issue. Agnostics and "weak" atheists would agree that these certain gods are not real, but as to the question if there is or is not a god one would have to say they didn't know. I can say right now that the christian god is not real, but that does not mean that I'm saying there is no god.

Spaz, your wasting your time on Radorth. He doesn't realize that when it comes to religions other than his own, he is also an atheist. Like many Christians, he is too busy spreading the good news and thus not listening to others and thinking about what they have said.

Starboy

Yellum Notnef · 05-04-2003, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spaz
Those 3 examples seem to hinge on particular beliefs, which aren't the issue. Agnostics and "weak" atheists would agree that these certain gods are not real, but as to the question if there is or is not a god one would have to say they didn't know. I can say right now that the christian god is not real, but that does not mean that I'm saying there is no god.

Exactly!

The problem with talking to Radorth and many other Christians is as follows......

Agnostic/atheist: I don't belive any god has ever revealed himself to us,but theres always the possiblitly that an unknown god could exist somewhere out there.

Radorth and other Christians: There IS a god and his name is JESUS! HE died for your sins and you HAVE to follow this ancient rule book or you won't get to go to a magic place after you die and live forever with him!
We can't actually prove any of this to you,BUT YOU JUST HAVE TO BELIEVE ME BECUASE I'M NOT AN IDIOT!
And in case you DO think I'm an idiot and don't want to believe me,heres a list of well known people who also believe Jesus is god: M.Scott Peck,C.S Lewis etc etc....

Bible Humper · 05-04-2003, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Well, perhaps I'm overestimating the number of atheists who claim to know God does not exist, based on the attitudes and statements/phrases I've read here. "There is no God Radorth." ...fairy-tale gods... Jesus never existed. We don't need to answer because there is no god. If God exists he would be a murderer. Glad to hear a couple of you are really borderline agnostics. However speaking and acting as if there is no God, or he is so bad as to be unworthy of recognition is to me the same as "knowing" there is no God.

I notice that theists like to equate conceding that it is not possible to actually demonstrate that an invisible, intangible, incomprehensible and inactive entity does not exist with agnosticism.

You can't actually demonstrate that Papa Smurf and Santa Claus don't exist either, so you may as well call us Agsantaists too. Nor can it be proven that we aren't all brains in a laboratory, being fed stimuli directly instead of through sensory organs.

More important is the fact that all theist are "agnostic" too, since reason and perception, our only tools for discerning truth, are both considered insufficient.

Opus36 · 05-05-2003, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Radorth
Does Jesus suck as well? How about M. Scott Peck?

Rad [/B]

Hehehehehehehehehhehehehe.

beyelzu · 05-05-2003, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Radorth
Does Jesus suck as well?

Rad

Well, I have heard that he gives a mean blowjob but the beard is kind of itchy, but since I have no actual experience with our lord and savior I am agnostic on the subject of messianic head.

I hope that this is clear enough for you rad.

Spaz · 05-05-2003, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Beyelzu
Well, I have heard that he gives a mean blowjob but the beard is kind of itchy, but since I have no actual experience with our lord and savior I am agnostic on the subject of messianic head.

Blasphemer! That's a one-way ticket to hell right there

mike_decock · 05-05-2003, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Beyelzu
Well, I have heard that he gives a mean blowjob but the beard is kind of itchy, but since I have no actual experience with our lord and savior I am agnostic on the subject of messianic head.

Just make sure he takes the cigarette out of his mouth before he goes down on you.

-Mike...

Opera Nut · 05-05-2003, 09:09 PM

Logically, the burden of proof is on the believer to prove that his god exists. The burden of proof is never on the unbeliever, since proving a negative is a logical impossibility, even though it may be a fact proven through circumstantial evidence in a court of law. Those are two very different standards.

Civil law standard: Preponderance of the evidence. >50%, even the smallest possible increment over one-half, by the standards of judgment of a reasonable person.

Criminal law standard: Beyond a reasonable doubt. There is no real numerical definition for this one, just the reasonable man standard.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-05-2003, 09:09 PM	#39
Opera Nut Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Houston TX Posts: 1,671	Logically, the burden of proof is on the believer to prove that his god exists. The burden of proof is never on the unbeliever, since proving a negative is a logical impossibility, even though it may be a fact proven through circumstantial evidence in a court of law. Those are two very different standards. Civil law standard: Preponderance of the evidence. >50%, even the smallest possible increment over one-half, by the standards of judgment of a reasonable person. Criminal law standard: Beyond a reasonable doubt. There is no real numerical definition for this one, just the reasonable man standard.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.