Vibr8gKiwi

You are misled. There is no convincing evidence against Santa Claus.

This is because your parents didn't believe in SC and you were probably bad too. If your parents believed and you were good your parents wouldn’t have had to step in for Santa.

The Santa gaps are not closed. There's always an infinite amount of space between the explanations, just like there's an infinite number of numbers between any two numbers.

You just don't want to believe in Santa 'cause you enjoy being bad and don't want to change. Deep inside you really know Santa exists, but you make up all these excuses to cover for your hard heart.

[ August 30, 2002: Message edited by: Vibr8gKiwi ]</p>

Vanderzyden

Apparently you complain about an external standard by which you might be evaluated.

Then you insist on a standard by which God must show himself.

Do you see the contradiction?

Vanderzyden

[ August 30, 2002: Message edited by: Vanderzyden ]</p>

Vibr8gKiwi

I'm not Dr S., but Huh? Who has ever made any complaints about not wanting to be evaluated to exist?

That and nobody is insisting on standards by which some supposed god must show himself. But certainly no one could be expected to believe in something that is so completely and totally hidden that it seems to not exist. The contradiction actually rests in Christian concept of god: A being expects humans to believe or be forever tortured, but hides so as to appear to not exist?

Do you see the contradiction?

[ August 30, 2002: Message edited by: Vibr8gKiwi ]</p>

Dr S

(V) Apparently you complain about an external standard by which you might be evaluated.
(S) Are you asking if I am concerned about getting a lump of coal in my stocking? These socks are getting a touch ripe, perhaps a little charcoal filtering would help.
I am equally concerned as to if Santa thinks that I've been naughty as to if the Lord God of the Universe sends me to an Hieronymus Bosch-esque pit of Hell.

That is to say…not at all.

(V) Then you insist on a standard by which God must show himself.
(S) I insist that Santa show himself too if he wants to be believed in.

(V) Do you see the contradiction?
(S) No, what I see is desperation. You realize that you have absolutely no reason to think that there are any gods at all, let alone Yahweh. And you are trying to pass bluster off as logic.

Now if you'll excuse me I have to write my letter to the North Pole. I wonder if a pony could fit down my chimney?

Vanderzyden

Oh, I see, you are genuinely disingenuous, Dr S. I will make it a point not to engage you further. (Unless you are willing to dialogue candidly.)

G'day!

luvluv

Well, my parents beliefs don't apply as I understand it. I don't even think belief in Santa is required, according to how Santa is defined. All I need to do to recieve from Santa is to be good. (unless you have some superior source on Santa orthodoxy?)

At the end of the day, all I have to do to disprove Santa is prove that one child who was good did not recieve presents one Christmas.

Can't you see how it is easier to prove this than it is to prove that the universe and life created itself out of nothing?

B. H. Manners

""At the end of the day, all I have to do to disprove Santa is prove that one child who was good did not recieve presents one Christmas""--Qoute from luvluv

BH:

If you can please do it.

[ August 30, 2002: Message edited by: BH ]</p>

Vanderzyden

Ah, so we can clearly see one criteria for evidence! These excerpts bring it clearly into the light:


Allow me to presume that most of the atheists and agnostics on this board all agree that the evidence must be visible to the human eye.

Three things come immediately to mind:

1. Presuming the typical answer is yes, then may I ask why? Why must God make himself visible?

2. Furthermore, does it have to be direct or indirect visible evidence?

3. Upon what basis are such standards set?

Note: Perhaps there are critical reasons why a perfect God could not show himself directly to humans.

Vanderzyden

[ August 30, 2002: Message edited by: Vanderzyden ]

[ August 30, 2002: Message edited by: Vanderzyden ]</p>

Vanderzyden

[ August 30, 2002: Message edited by: Vanderzyden ]</p>

Autonemesis

Because he requires belief in his existence as a condition of granting salvation. Withholding what is required for belief to emerge in the mind of a person is the same as withholding salvation from that person.

It needs to be convincing, whatever it is. It needs to survive critical scrutiny.

You tell me. According to you, god made my mind work this way. Why would he manufacture my mind in such a way that it requires to be convinced before the state of mind called "belief" can emerge, and yet withhold exactly the sort of evidence that is required to surmount the obstacles to belief that god himself programmed it to possess?

Name one, preferably one that has the potential to answer the questions I just posed.