Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Proof

@ghost-of-a-duke said
So why did God give me a brain that requires certainty, not faith?

😲

Your brain is not in an either or state, that is totally you.

@kellyjay said
When you say evolution is a fact, define evolution so we know what this fact is.
Creationism is not a fact, I agree.
The earth is billions of years old, I imagine that is as sound as you evolution fact.
Your beliefs are extraordinary!

I am glad we agree that Creationism is false. BTW, ID is just Creationism with a slightly different hat.
Stop playing Devils' Advocate and look up information instead of whining at other people to "show me, define words for me, tell me". University studies are available by the hundreds on the web. Look for peer reviewed studies.
Your willful ignorance borders on outright deliberate deception.

@caissad4 said
I am glad we agree that Creationism is false. BTW, ID is just Creationism with a slightly different hat.
Stop playing Devils' Advocate and look up information instead of whining at other people to "show me, define words for me, tell me". University studies are available by the hundreds on the web. Look for peer reviewed studies.
Your willful ignorance borders on outright deliberate deception.

I did not say Creationism is false, only that is it isn't science. Believe it or not things can be true without science being able to study them, not being material isn't a limitation on truth.

The rest of your rant is just that.

@kellyjay said
When you say evolution is a fact, define evolution so we know what this fact is.
Creationism is not a fact, I agree.
The earth is billions of years old, I imagine that is as sound as you evolution fact.
Your beliefs are extraordinary!

You are clearly a liar.
You just posted that Creationism is NOT a fact.
Please read your post

@caissad4 said
You are clearly a liar.
You just posted that Creationism is NOT a fact.
Please read your post

Your right I mis-spoke I was agreeing with you when you said.

"Creationism is not science fact"

It isn't.

@moonbus said
@the-christians-here

Kindly provide evidence (or proof) that souls exist. I'm not asking for an airtight logically flawless irrefutable deduction from indisputable axioms, just some rational reason to think any such thing as a soul exists. And please don't waste your and my time telling me that consciousness exists, or sensation, perception, feelings, memory etc. exist. Ca ...[text shortened]... , anyone? Give me a reason to think souls exist, something metaphysical, not mere psychology.

"Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter." -- Yoda

😀

@galveston75 said
Yep, typical "don't believe everything the bible says" silliness you create.

You are the guys that started that "silliness" by writing your own Bible.

@eladar said
Good luck getting anything out of Suzi. She does not discuss anything, just complains at people.

She's better at being genuine than you! You have a phony persecution complex that undermines any real, meaningful discussion.

@suzianne said
Sorry. Truth is, I got nuthin'.

I've always said there can be no proof of God, or even not God.

You either believe or you don't. Either way, you're still human, and deserve to be treated as such.

See, that is harrowingly skeptical, coming from a 'non-skeptic'.

Surely the only reason one can be a theist is that they think it is more likely than not that there is a god?

@kellyjay said
Your brain is not in an either or state, that is totally you.

My brain IS in an 'either-or' state. I replaced it with logic circuits to save money.

@bigdoggproblem said
See, that is harrowingly skeptical, coming from a 'non-skeptic'.

Surely the only reason one can be a theist is that they think is more likely than not that there is a god?

Correctamundo.

I do think it more likely than not that there is a God.

I just have no iron-clad proof.

Look, I'm flying-by-wire here. The teachings of Jesus are well-documented, and they describe a coherent way to live a life the way it should be lived. I have no inherent reason to disbelieve it.

If I get to the end and there's no God, no Jesus, I'll be disappointed, sure, but my life still would have had value.

@suzianne said
Correctamundo.

I do think it more likely than not that there is a God.

I just have no iron-clad proof.

Most things in life lack an "iron-clad" proof.

That being said, I will admit that the "god" question is very difficult, and reasonable people almost certainly will get different answers.

I've just met waaaay too many smart theists to think that only stupid people believe in god. [I've also met some dumb atheists, as well]

@bigdoggproblem said
Most things in life lack an "iron-clad" proof.

That being said, I will admit that the "god" question is very difficult, and reasonable people almost certainly will get different answers.

I've just met waaaay too many smart theists to think that only stupid people believe in god. [I've also met some dumb atheists, as well]

There are worse things than to be a student of the human condition.

@suzianne said
It's a faith claim. It cannot be proven or disproved. As such, it is an example of free will.

You're perfectly free to take it seriously or not. That's what free will is about. You'll notice that I have no record here (unlike some Christians in this forum) of 'shoving my ideology down anyone's throat' or judging them for not believing it. I believe in free will.

See, I find this post difficult to swallow.

Faith cannot be completely free of overlap from observation and evidence. If it were, it would have absolutely no grounding in anything remotely connected to anything real people experience in real life.

The decision to take a claim seriously, FAR from being a simple "free-will" decision, is based on an evaluation of the claim, and how strong [or weak] it is.

This evaluation happens in our brain. We can't change the result of the outcome. At best, we can try to pretend we did not actually reach THAT evaluation.

@suzianne said
There are worse things than to be a student of the human condition.

Point being, one must often be content with inductive proofs. Without them, we could not claim to 'know' much at all.