@sonship saidYes, I am claiming the existence of a child dying of a terminal disease is evidence that an all powerful and perfectly loving God does not exist. For either He 'will not' intervene' or He 'can not.' If He 'will not' he is not perfectly lovingly and if He 'can not' He is not all powerful.
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
THAT Ghost is another issue. THAT is "I DON'T LIKE THE WAY GOD RUNS THINGS if He is real."
I think that is another issue. Your disapproval of the way God would let something happen is your saying you don't like God's ways if there is a God.
Are you claiming this is evidence that there is no God?
Yes or No?
This argument is not new and has been put forward by other philosophers. (Philips I believe was one).
@ghost-of-a-duke saidI’m not dodging anything. You asked that question to another poster.
Love how Christians asked for evidence that God does not exist and then dodge this question.
@pb1022 saidIndeed. The reason my question was directed at Sonship.
I’m not dodging anything. You asked that question to another poster.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidThen you shouldn’t claim “Christians” (plural) dodged that question as though no Christian could answer it.
Indeed. The reason my question was directed at Sonship.
@sonship saidFolks? Do you imagine you draw a crowd? You are a funny one. And I told you right from the start I don't have any evidence that god doesn't exist. You're the one making the fantastic claim, the burden of proof lies with you. There is none, of course, else you'd not feel the need to resort to rhetoric and pantomime.
Argument by Loud Laughter is what avalanchethecat is opted for.
The poverty of his rational is hidden behind a avalanche of loud laughter instead.
Folks we are not going to get any evidence that God doesn't exist from the atheist here. We are going to get loud laughter as a feeble substitute for evidence.
@sonship saidSuch frauds and deceit is uncovered very quickly in the scientific world. Not so with the fraud and deceit perpetrated in the name of god, eh?
@avalanchethecat
You should laugh at the hoaxes by which you were deceived to believe in missing links and ape men.
You should laugh out loud at a few bones being separated by many yards of space put together to be one "person".
You should laugh out loud at the forgeries of fossils sold for money to put one over on people eager to find evidence of such transitional links between species.
1 edit
@avalanchethecat
You can laugh and you can laugh out loud. You can laugh long, loud and heartily.
I do not laugh at your plight in the least because it is no laughing matter.
It is rather tragic how you are hardening your will against good reasons to believe in God.
The Teleological Argument (What it really says)
@avalanchethecat said<<There is none, of course, else you'd not feel the need to resort to rhetoric and pantomime.>>
Folks? Do you imagine you draw a crowd? You are a funny one. And I told you right from the start I don't have any evidence that god doesn't exist. You're the one making the fantastic claim, the burden of proof lies with you. There is none, of course, else you'd not feel the need to resort to rhetoric and pantomime.
Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ has persuaded experts in evaluating evidence that the Resurrection of Jesus Christ happened. I posted an article identifying those experts before; want me to again? Two were atheists before they investigated the evidence.
@avalanchethecat saidPiltdown Man wasn’t exposed as a fraud for 40 years.
Such frauds and deceit is uncovered very quickly in the scientific world. Not so with the fraud and deceit perpetrated in the name of god, eh?
The fraudulent embryo drawings put forth by Ernst Haeckel were still taught as fact in some schools even after they were exposed as a fraud.
The theory of evolution isn’t science. It’s a religion for atheists. If atheists would stop pretending it’s science, I’d stop talking about it.
1 edit
@pb1022 saidSonship asked the question, 'What is your absolutely strongest piece of evidence that there is no God?'
Then you shouldn’t claim “Christians” (plural) dodged that question as though no Christian could answer it.
I answered him. You were noway involved in the exchange.
And how is me saying 'Christians' any didn't from you generalizing with 'atheists', as you have done on a couple of occasions? And did you object when sonship said no atheist had answered his question when he had deliberately ignored the answer I had given him?
@sonship saidpb1022 will be here momentarily to object to you giving a youtube link. There is no way he is biased enough only to object to an atheist doing so.
Was Evolution Inevitable?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_H0yoBiBM5s
@ghost-of-a-duke saidSonship, why ask a question and then ignore the answer?
Yes, I am claiming the existence of a child dying of a terminal disease is evidence that an all powerful and perfectly loving God does not exist. For either He 'will not' intervene' or He 'can not.' If He 'will not' he is not perfectly lovingly and if He 'can not' He is not all powerful.
This argument is not new and has been put forward by other philosophers. (Philips I believe was one).
Stumped?
@ghost-of-a-duke said<<Sonship asked the question, 'What is your absolutely strongest piece of evidence that there is no God?'
Sonship asked the question, 'What is your absolutely strongest piece of evidence that there is no God?'
I answered him. You were noway involved in the exchange.
And how is me saying 'Christians' and didn't from you generalizing with 'atheists', as you have done on a couple of occasions? And did you object when sonship said no atheist had answered his question when he had deliberately ignored the answer I had given him?
I answered him. You were noway involved in the exchange.>>
Right. I only became involved when you claimed “Christians” (plural) dodged your question as though no Christian could answer it.
<<And how is me saying 'Christians' and didn't from you generalizing with 'atheists', as you have done on a couple of occasions?>>
Maybe it doesn’t. But when you imply no Christian can answer a question - when you specifically asked it of one person - I think it’s necessary to point out that your question wasn’t asked of a general audience of Christians.
<<And did you object when sonship said no atheist had answered his question when he had deliberately ignored the answer I had given him?>>
I didn’t see the answer you gave him.
@pb1022 saidThere is no evidence outside scripture, which is to say, no credible evidence at all.
<<There is none, of course, else you'd not feel the need to resort to rhetoric and pantomime.>>
Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ has persuaded experts in evaluating evidence that the Resurrection of Jesus Christ happened. I posted an article identifying those experts before; want me to again? Two were atheists before they investigated the evidence.