Who created the deity?

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

why  anybody believes anything without evidence is totally alien to me.

What would you consider as evidence?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Maybe someone should open a thread on the Arian heresy It won't be me, though I do know something about it .

Aw Go on............... Go on Go on Go on Go on Go on   

[Dicky Underpants]

Aw Go on............... Go on Go on Go on Go on Go on

These will be my last words on the subject: Arius died instantly of a rectal prolapse, after being 'taken short'. This was obviously the judgment of a righteous deity, punishing a vile false prophet.

[Dicky Underpants]

Alas that's what sometimes comes when you talk through your arse.

You need to watch out then!

[Maeght]

Maybe someone should open a thread on the Arian heresy It won't be me, though I do know something about it - certainly more than Floo, who last time I mentioned it thought I was referring to the other word spelt with a Y and associated with crazy Nazi  ideas

I should warn anyone, though, that this might open the floodgates of Sassy's logorrhoea, since she is a latter-day Arian.

I could certainly understand that people might not consider Jesus as devine and still be a branch of Christianity but I think not believing in God would be pushing it!

[Walter]

What do you think I believe?

Ive already said I have no idea. why don't you just tell me and why you believe it

[Walter]

What would you consider as evidence?

erm... evidence, as in empirical

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

I could certainly understand that people might not consider Jesus as devine and still be a branch of Christianity but I think not believing in God would be pushing it!

Have you heard of non-realistic Christianity Maeght?

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

erm... evidence, as in empirical

Can you give any examples of what you would consider as empirical evidence, as you are already claiming in your #147 that there is none.

why  anybody believes anything without evidence is totally alien to me.

[Walter]

Can you give any examples of what you would consider as empirical evidence?

It would be more productive if you produced your 'evidence ' then we could evaluate it on the board.

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

It would be more productive if you produced your 'evidence ' then we could evaluate it on the board.

Can you outline the process that you will be using to evaluating any evidence, since you cannot give any examples of what you would consider as evidence?

[Sassy]

Sassy

is English your first language?

Πιστεύετε ότι μια γλώσσα θα αφαιρέσει το εμπόδιο για την αδυναμία σας να κατανοήσετε;
Ή να κρύψουν το γεγονός είστε σκόπιμη αποφυγή απαντώντας στη θέση;

[Walter]

Have you heard of non-realistic Christianity Maeght?

ive just read that .thanks. its a bit of an oxymoron though.

[Walter]

Can you outline the process that you will be using to evaluating any evidence, since you cannot give any examples of what you would consider as evidence?

If you look up 'empirical evidence' it tells you there.

[Walter]

Πιστεύετε ότι μια γλώσσα θα αφαιρέσει το εμπόδιο για την αδυναμία σας να κατανοήσετε;
Ή να κρύψουν το γεγονός είστε σκόπιμη αποφυγή απαντώντας στη θέση;

I thought so,

[Hope]

Have you heard of non-realistic Christianity Maeght?

One doesn't have to be a 'non-realistic Christian' to 'believe in God - but not in a fairy tale way'.  One simply has to be a Christian.

[Hope]

If you look up 'empirical evidence' it tells you there.

The problem with your reliance on 'empirical' evidence is that it requires the evidence to be naturalistic, which requires one to believe that everything is naturalistic in nature.  As I've pointed out a number of times over the last years, everyday life involves a mix of naturalistic and non-naturalistic aspects.

[Walter]

Hope

I know you have and up to now you haven't told us what those non-naturalistic aspects are, though you've been asked many times

[Gordon]

The problem with your reliance on 'empirical' evidence is that it requires the evidence to be naturalistic, which requires one to believe that everything is naturalistic in nature.

It doesn't, since provided it is supported by an appropriate methodology you are perfectly free to present evidence that is mutually exclusive from naturalism - over to you.

As I've pointed out a number of times over the last years, everyday life involves a mix of naturalistic and non-naturalistic aspects.

So you have, but you've failed to demonstrate the latter.

[Hope]

It doesn't, since provided it is supported by an appropriate methodology you are perfectly free to present evidence that is mutually exclusive from naturalism - over to you.

That's been done, several times, over the years, Gordon - but it has simply been dismissed as being non-naturalistic in nature and therefore irrelevant

So you have, but you've failed to demonstrate the latter.

Sorry, Gordon, but I haven't failed to demonstrate anything; rather, the non-naturalistic aspects I've referred to have generally been ignored or explained away in an un-naturalistic manner.

However - let's take reality.  What is it?

[Gordon]

That's been done, several times, over the years, Gordon - but it has simply been dismissed as being non-naturalistic in nature and therefore irrelevant

It hasn't you know - if you think so heel free to remind us.

Sorry, Gordon, but I haven't failed to demonstrate anything; rather, the non-naturalistic aspects I've referred to have generally been ignored or explained away in an un-naturalistic manner.

That would be because you cited naturalistic stuff.

[Walter]

Hope

I think you are actually incapable of knowing the difference between reality and fiction on this subject.
Its not your fault, its the way your brain has developed.

[Maeght]

Ive already said I have no idea. why don't you just tell me and why you believe it

By asking that you're assuming I have a belief aren't you? I don't. I am an atheist. But not one who thinks calling people's beliefs nonsense is a way of understanding why they have those beliefs.

[Hope]

Hope

I think you are actually incapable of knowing the difference between reality and fiction on this subject.
Its not your fault, its the way your brain has developed.

And what way would that be, Walter?  From the few posts of yours I've read, I'd suggest that you have a very weak grasp of reality - a lot of what you have said has been discussed and shown to be open to debate over the period you claim to have been browsing here.

[Hope]

Hope

I know you have and up to now you haven't told us what those non-naturalistic aspects are, though you've been asked many times

Not only me but others have as well, Walter.  As I've pointed out, they generally get dismissed on the very grounds that they are non-naturalistic.

Whilst I wouldn't claim wikipedia as a foolproof source, I found this opening gambit on reality interesting:

Reality is the state of things as they actually exist, rather than as they may appear or might be imagined.[1] In a wider definition, reality includes everything that is and has been, whether or not it is observable or comprehensible. A still broader definition includes everything that has existed, exists, or will exist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality