I see the watchtower has trained you well young Jedi. Wear down your opponent with a pointless circular argument that goes nowhere.
Why do religious people make claims and then refuse to back them up?
by Viviane 114 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Finkelstein
Are you talking to me Clambake ?
-
Viviane
Asking religious people to prove the existence of god is like asking an atheist to disprove there being any intelligence in our design.
I ask again, why do you imagine these are the same? You've no need to confuse the Jedi with the WT in order to answer this.
-
Clambake
Why ?
Both are unanswerable questions silly.
But of course science not today but tomorrow will figure it all for us. Progress is being made. Blah blah blah. We have big thick books with really complex answers.
It find it funny how the pro-science crowd often seems to be bigger deists than religious people.
-
Viviane
Both are unanswerable questions silly.
No no no.... you don't get it. Why do you think the questions are equivalent in quality and nature? Just because two math equations equal zero doesn't mean the equations are the same. Similarly, you are said one question is like the other, not that they have the same answer.
Why do you think the questions are like each other?
But of course science not today but tomorrow will figure it all for us. Progress is being made. Blah blah blah. We have big thick books with really complex answers.
It find it funny how the pro-science crowd often seems to be bigger deists than religious people.You seem to be conflating a lot of ideas that aren't the same. What does being pro-science have, in particular, to do with being deist, which very few religious people are? In what way do you think progress and answers are blah blah blah?
-
Finkelstein
The majority of pro science crowd as you say are atheists not deists.
or maybe your just being argumentatively vindictive.
-
cappytan
Asking religious people to prove the existence of god is like asking an atheist to disprove there being any intelligence in our design.
There's a huge difference between those two things.
Atheists/agnostics do not claim that there is no intelligence in our "design." They just point out the fallacy of coming to a conclusion that something exists when there is no evidence to support that conclusion. You can't prove a negative. Either you have evidence of something or you don't.
Faith is not evidence. Warm and fuzzy stories are not evidence. An old book is not evidence.
-
Viviane
Atheists/agnostics do not claim that there is no intelligence in our "design." They just point out the fallacy of coming to a conclusion that something exists when there is no evidence to support that conclusion. You can't prove a negative. Either you have evidence of something or you don't.
CAPPY! I was trying to get clambake to come to that conclusion or at least allow him/her to prevaricate enough that it was obvious he didn't know.
-
cappytan
CAPPY! I was trying to get clambake to come to that conclusion or at least allow him/her to prevaricate enough that it was obvious he didn't know.
Sorry! I didn't mean to be rational! Where was my
brainwashing"training from infancy" when Viviane needed it?! -
done4good
Why ?
Both are unanswerable questions silly.
But of course science not today but tomorrow will figure it all for us. Progress is being made. Blah blah blah. We have big thick books with really complex answers.
So simple answers are always correct?
It find it funny how the pro-science crowd often seems to be bigger deists than religious people.
This proves you do not understand science at all. Science is not about having all of the answers not about even potentially finding them all. It is about open questioning and exploration without biased presuppositions, mostly. Theists cannot do this, because all lines of argumentation must affirm their belief. As I stated earlier, if we just started with the proper definition of the term belief, there would be no debate to begin with.
d4g