Originally posted by Jorge Borges
[b]It seems you are suggesting that the default is that god exists and atheists should have the burden to prove that he doesn't. Something doesn't exist by default with the requirement to prove it false.

But, if I claim unequivocally that God does not exist, then I am asserting that which I cannot prove. If I have no evidence to back up my asser [/b]

Fair enough. But what you've just described is not atheism, but agnosticism.[/b]

And theists are right to require atheists to provide real evidence that God doesn't exist before they cease believing. It is vastly more difficult, though, to provide evidence in support of a negative than a positive.

Again, you're putting the burden of proof on the people who aren't making the extraordinary claim.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Claiming that an invisible, all-powerful god exists is an extraordinary claim - no one has provided any evidence other than a book.

The belief that god doesn't exist is the same as claiming that unicorns don't exist. It's not saying you aren't open to the possibility of it/them existing - it just means you're not believing in them without reason to.


Fair enough. But what you've just described is not atheism, but agnosticism.

No I didn't. I described atheism.

Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
i agree, i should have worded that better. i currently still pray, but my advice to anyone is to pray if it makes you feel good but never, ever, under any circumstances believe or even hope that they will be answered.

Pray to what or whom?
Kelly

Originally posted by PsychoPawn

And theists are right to require atheists to provide real evidence that God doesn't exist before they cease believing. It is vastly more difficult, though, to provide evidence in support of a negative than a positive.

Again, you're putting the burden of proof on the people who aren't making the extraordinary claim.

Extraordinary claims req ...[text shortened]... st described is not atheism, but agnosticism.[/i]

No I didn't. I described atheism.

Claims are being made, both by the theist and atheist.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Claims are being made, both by the theist and atheist.
Kelly

Yes, but the theist is making extraordinary claims and the atheist is not.

EDIT: I'm still having trouble with the lack of belief in somethings existence being characterized as a "claim".

Originally posted by KellyJay
Claims are being made, both by the theist and atheist.
Kelly

Yes, atheists are claiming that the belief in the existence of god requires evidence.

That's a pretty sound claim and is simply based on the requirement of evidence.

Theists are claiming that an invisible, omniscient and omnipotent being exists independent of time and space.

That's an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence.

Originally posted by TheSkipper
Yes, but the theist is making extraordinary claims and the atheist is not.

EDIT: I'm still having trouble with the lack of belief in somethings existence being characterized as a "claim".

Oh please, extraordinary such as everything coming from nothing?
How about grass, moss, elephants, spiders, eagles, whales, snails,
ants, trees, jelly fish, crabs, and people all share common ancestors
that isn't extraordinary? Simply in the eyes of the beholder that
term!
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Oh please, extraordinary such as everything coming from nothing?
How about grass, moss, elephants, spiders, eagles, whales, snails,
ants, trees, jelly fish, crabs, and people all share common ancestors
that isn't extraordinary? Simply in the eyes of the beholder that
term!
Kelly

Wait...we were discussing the existence or non-existence of God just a second ago. Why are you talking about elephants?

Besides, if you really must drag evolution into it, there are reams of evidence supporting the idea of common ancestors for all living things. There is no evidence for the existence of God; God is, by definition, an irrational belief.

Originally posted by TheSkipper
Wait...we were discussing the existence or non-existence of God just a second ago. Why are you talking about elephants?

Besides, if you really must drag evolution into it, there are reams of evidence supporting the idea of common ancestors for all living things. There is no evidence for the existence of God; God is, by definition, an irrational belief.

The point is that God being real or not colors everything else from
morals, how the universe got here and so on it is all connected.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
The point is that God being real or not colors everything else

Yes - so there should be actual colors (i.e. evidence) that would be consistent with god existing, yet there isn't.

I.e. there would be consistent evidence of an earthwide flood a-la Noah story if there was one.

I.e. There would be actual archeological evidence of Moses et al's travel through the desert, but there isn't.

Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
my first point: god is not real. indeed he is not, i don't need to prove that.

...

why shouldn't you need to prove that ?
You cannot prove anything because you can't.
You can't prove that God does not exist because you have no logical arguments.
All you have are feelings and views , but these are not arguments.
See , you are more ignorant than those you consider as ignorant and stupid people.
There are more reasons to believe in God than reasons to deny his existence.

Originally posted by HFRorbis
why shouldn't you need to prove that ?
You cannot prove anything because you can't.
You can't prove that God does not exist because you have no logical arguments.
All you have are feelings and views , but these are not arguments.
See , you are more ignorant than those you consider as ignorant and stupid people.
There are more reasons to believe in God than reasons to deny his existence.

I guess you believe unicorns exist too, eh? Or, can you prove they don't exist?

Originally posted by TheSkipper
I guess you believe unicorns exist too, eh? Or, can you prove they don't exist?

Yes, only pink ones though.

Originally posted by TheSkipper
I guess you believe unicorns exist too, eh? Or, can you prove they don't exist?

Comparing God and unicorns is wrong.
Both can't be compared to prove something like you do.

Let's try this reasoning:

A exists but His/its existence cannot be proved.
x thinks that A exists but he cannot prove his/its existence
y thinks that A does not exist but he cannot prove that A does not exist
Whatever y says to deny His/its existence , A exists.
Of course if A does not exist then y is right but if A exists then x is right.
So , thinking that A does not exist is not a proof or an argument.
And if there are many more reasons to believe that A exists than denying His/its existence then you are more likely to believe in the existence of A.
That is the same reasoning for God : you cannot scientifically prove Him and deny His existence but there are many more reasons (logical , historical , natural) to prove His existence than claiming that it does not exist.
You got my reasoning now ?

You got my reasoning now ?

That which you just laid before the eyes of God and man can hardly be called reasoning.

Originally posted by HFRorbis
Comparing God and unicorns is wrong.
Both can't be compared to prove something like you do.

Let's try this reasoning:

A exists but His/its existence cannot be proved.
x thinks that A exists but he cannot prove his/its existence
y thinks that A does not exist but he cannot prove that A does not exist
Whatever y says to deny His/its existence , A ex ...[text shortened]... ural) to prove His existence than claiming that it does not exist.
You got my reasoning now ?

wtf? Are you on wifi right outside the tower of babel, or something?

Please, provide me with evidence for the existence of God.