Bringing Christianity into disrepute!

[BeRational]

I answered that, and you know it.  What's your problem?  Don't bother to answer:  I have no more to say.

I do not believe you!

Answer now. It would be quicker than typing what you have.

If you had really answered you would have the nerve to say yes or no.

Why is this simple question beyond you?

[Shaker]

I answered that, and you know it.

He may do.

I don't.

Where?

[BashfulAnthony]

He may do.

I don't.

Where?

It's now such a long-standing silliness, I can't even recollect; and don't want to.

[BeRational]

It's now such a long-standing silliness, I can't even recollect; and don't want to.

You do not need to recollect.

Just answer yes or no now.

It is really really simple, but too difficult for you it seems.

[savillerow]

I can say it as often as you like. I could be wrong. Eezy Peezy

[BeRational]

I can say it as often as you like. I could be wrong. Eezy Peezy

It is easy for some, me included to say.
Others, it seems, it is very hard to the point of not possible.

[Sassy]

I do not believe you!

Answer now. It would be quicker than typing what you have.

If you had really answered you would have the nerve to say yes or no.

Why is this simple question beyond you?

That is not a YES or NO question.

Why not have a discussion about why there are more believers in God than there are Atheists and ask yourself who is most likely to be right than wrong giving the vast numbers that believe in God.

Bash has experienced the presence of God. Have you?
Well how can you ask the question and question his experience when you have felt Gods presence.

So what is it you want him to do? Lie and pretend he does not believe in his personal experience of God. Truth is you are not open minded otherwise you would show Bash the courtesy of believing him when he says he believes his experience of God  is real.  If open minded and sincere you would not question the possibility that he sincerely believes he knows God presence so has no reason to believe it could be wrong.

[Shaker]

That is not a YES or NO question.

Why not have a discussion about why there are more believers in God than there are Atheists and ask yourself who is most likely to be right than wrong giving the vast numbers that believe in God.

And after a few coughs and splutters, the Fallacy Bandwagon kicks into life once more.

[Aruntraveller]

Why not have a discussion about why there are more believers in God than there are Atheists and ask yourself who is most likely to be right than wrong giving the vast numbers that believe in God.

We've been through this before Sass. The number of people believing any given thing does nothing to prove the rightness or otherwise of the situation.

As I stated previously, at one time the majority of people believed the earth was flat. They were wrong.

Your argument is facile.

[floo]

That is not a YES or NO question.

Why not have a discussion about why there are more believers in God than there are Atheists and ask yourself who is most likely to be right than wrong giving the vast numbers that believe in God.

Bash has experienced the presence of God. Have you?
Well how can you ask the question and question his experience when you have felt Gods presence.

So what is it you want him to do? Lie and pretend he does not believe in his personal experience of God. Truth is you are not open minded otherwise you would show Bash the courtesy of believing him when he says he believes his experience of God  is real.  If open minded and sincere you would not question the possibility that he sincerely believes he knows God presence so has no reason to believe it could be wrong.

Sass there is NO evidence the deity exists. The brain is a remarkable organ and can convince people something is 'true' however fanciful that belief happens to be.

[Hope]

I don't know quite how 'right' non-believers such as bluehillside and Shaker think they are - but I certainly have no fears for society from them, since they both seem to have thought through their philosophies right to the bedrock (which is more than I can say for most of the believers I've come across).

Like you, I don't think that society has anything to fear from the likes of bhs and Shaker, though I would disagree that they "both seem to have thought through their philosophies right to the bedrock".  Over time, they have both made what, to me, appear to be fundamental errors in their arguments.

[Hope]

Sass there is NO evidence the deity exists. The brain is a remarkable organ and can convince people something is 'true' however fanciful that belief happens to be.

I'm sorry, Floo, but there is only "'No' evidence the deity exists" because you seem to believe in a reality that is only physical.  Others do not believe that reality is limited to that aspect.

[floo]

Like you, I don't think that society has anything to fear from the likes of bhs and Shaker, though I would disagree that they "both seem to have thought through their philosophies right to the bedrock".  Over time, they have both made what, to me, appear to be fundamental errors in their arguments.

One could argue your faith position has fundamental errors too!

[2Corrie]

I'm sorry, Floo, but there is only "'No' evidence the deity exists" because you seem to believe in a reality that is only physical.  Others do not believe that reality is limited to that aspect.

I would say to the contrary that the physical world itself is evidence for God, and that some people are in wilful rebellion of their creator.

[Hope]

I would say to the contrary that the physical world itself is evidence for God, ...

I would agree with you, 2Corrie, but part of the issue is that that physical world is more than merely physical.

[Hope]

One could argue your faith position has fundamental errors too!

One could, but when people like you make such fundamental errors - such as claiming that Mary was a victim of child abuse because she became pregnant as a young teenager when the cultural norm of the time was that children became adults far younger than they do now.

[Gordon]

I'm sorry, Floo, but there is only "'No' evidence the deity exists" because you seem to believe in a reality that is only physical.  Others do not believe that reality is limited to that aspect.

And these 'others'', such as yourself, have abjectly (and unsurprisingly) failed to demonstrate that this unreality that they claim exists is somehow part of the real!

[floo]

I would say to the contrary that the physical world itself is evidence for God, and that some people are in wilful rebellion of their creator.

You would say that, wouldn't you?

There is NO evidence the deity featured in that book had anything to do with the creation of the universe. But supposing it did then all right minded people should be in rebellion against that evil psycho.

[Shaker]

Like you, I don't think that society has anything to fear from the likes of bhs and Shaker, though I would disagree that they "both seem to have thought through their philosophies right to the bedrock".  Over time, they have both made what, to me, appear to be fundamental errors in their arguments.

So why is it that whenever you're asked, as you have been many, many times, to point out these alleged errors, you're unable to do so?

[Sassy]

And after a few coughs and splutters, the Fallacy Bandwagon kicks into life once more.

You don't have an answer, I see.
Probably would have been more sensible to have said nothing than let the whole world know you could not find a sensible reply.

[Sassy]

We've been through this before Sass. The number of people believing any given thing does nothing to prove the rightness or otherwise of the situation.

As I stated previously, at one time the majority of people believed the earth was flat. They were wrong.

Your argument is facile.

Poor answer Trent... (((SHAKES HEAD SMILEY)))

It was not a question of something be right or wrong.

It is about the personal experience of the individual. Go back to sleep.

[Maeght]

I would say to the contrary that the physical world itself is evidence for God, and that some people are in wilful rebellion of their creator.

Wilful suggests intentional - that some people know God exists but rebel by saying they don't. Is that what you mean? If so I don't know of anyone who that would fit.

[Gordon]

Like you, I don't think that society has anything to fear from the likes of bhs and Shaker, though I would disagree that they "both seem to have thought through their philosophies right to the bedrock".  Over time, they have both made what, to me, appear to be fundamental errors in their arguments.

That will be because your thinking is so ring-fenced within fallacies: and where, ironically, you have built said fence yourself (albeit on nothing as substantial as bedrock).

I'd suggest you urgently need to acquire some wire-cutters.

[Shaker]

You don't have an answer, I see.

Yup - it's known formally as the argumentum ad populum or argumentum ad numerum. (Don't tell Hope; he's very touchy about people identifying logical fallacies by their technical names for some reason). It's an appeal to numbers as a marker of the rightness of a position or the soundness of an argument. Trent covered it anyway a few posts up.

[Sassy]

Sass there is NO evidence the deity exists. The brain is a remarkable organ and can convince people something is 'true' however fanciful that belief happens to be.

Back to the drawing board, Floo.

Bash has experienced the presence of God. Have you?
Well how can you ask the question and question his experience when you have felt Gods presence.

So what is it you want him to do? Lie and pretend he does not believe in his personal experience of God. Truth is you are not open minded otherwise you would show Bash the courtesy of believing him when he says he believes his experience of God  is real.

Read and weep... not one of you could even give the reality the time to reply but ignored what was written....

So for all atheists read the above quote. And don't bother asking for a 'yes' or 'no' answer for something already explained.