The Case for Theism (page 7)

OUTLAW

And, until such time that it does meet the burden of proof the intellectually honest stand would be "we don't know".....StrongHaiku

Those words should be bronzed and set in a conspicuous place..

For the Intellectually Dishonest to Contemplate..

millie210

konceptual992 hours agoJust opened my browser after being out for a few hours. Saw this thread title and then three little Viviane avatars on the right - I just burst out laughing, knowing opening the thread would see the OP ripped to shreds.
And so it came to pass....

Ok, I just got to your post and already on the first page I see that you are correct.

No need to keep reading this thread - nothing can be learned.

Sorry fusion. I bet you were hoping for a discussion with a variety of posters. I hope you will try again sometime as I would have enjoyed reading.

cofty

Just read the OP.

Could not disagree more with every single point. Maybe later once I have read the thread - maybe not.

Once again so many people are hung up on the word "proof". It has no place in this sort of conversation. It belongs to mathematicians.

The evidence for theism (a creator god who cares about your fungal nail infection) is risible.

The case against such a god is overwhelmingly compelling.

It's about reason. Our beliefs should be commensurate with the evidence. Theists care nothing for evidence, that's why they invented a faux virtue they call faith.

StrongHaiku

cofty - Once again so many people are hung up on the word "proof". It has no place in this sort of conversation. It belongs to mathematicians.

Good point. In my postings, I meant "proof" in the sense that it is used in law and science - i.e. that a particular hypothesis has been verified or discounted. I did not intend to imply the use of "proof" in the mathematical context. My apologies if I caused any confusion.

cofty - It's about reason. Our beliefs should be commensurate with the evidence. Theists care nothing for evidence, that's why they invented a faux virtue they call faith.

Couldn't agree more.

Jonathan Drake

cofty - Once again so many people are hung up on the word "proof". It has no place in this sort of conversation. It belongs to mathematicians.

Yes, I see I actually misused "proof" too. I should have said "evidence"

cofty

I think that in normal usage among people who are interested in honest conversation it's fine to use "proof".

The problem here is that we have a chorus led by posters like Outlaw who think that since something can't be "proven" then both sides deserve equal merit.

It is not reasonable to allow that theists might just be right after all - it is thoroughly unreasonable.

Imagine you were on a jury. You have an overwhelming amount of compelling evidence indicating the guilt of the accused. Every single effort by the defense has been shown to be false.

Any reasonable and intelligent person who had been paying attention to the arguments would not hesitate to give a guilty verdict.

Imagine one person on the jury keeps on asserting that we can't "prove" that all of the DNA evidence, and the eyewitnesses, and the fingerprints and phone records and the CCTV and the written confession might be wrong. Even if it is a billion to one chance - it might be wrong.

People who think it is conceited to assert that there is no god are just like this juror.

Doltologist

A bloody good post Cofty. I couldn't agree more.

The balance of probability is way in favour of there being no god. Yes, it can't be proved, but that doesn't mean it should be given equal weighting with the premise that god does exist. That would be patently stupid.

freemindfade

I think the biggest problem here is the OP making someone who is an Atheist out to be essentially admitting the existence of god (sort of what the watchtower does with misquoting scientists) and second, by not acknowledging it, Viviane has turned down my marriage proposal *sadtrombone*

These two injustices are all the evidence I need their is no god!

Phizzy

Viv and Cofty are great ! they both cut through all the crap and bluster and show us the joys of chrystal clear, rational thinking.

Long may they both Post here, they are invaluable !

I do hope people like the guy who started the Thread continue to Post too, it is so educational for J.W's and other believers to be shown where their thoughts have gone awry.

OUTLAW

The problem here is that we have a chorus led by posters like Outlaw who think that since something can't be "proven" then both sides deserve equal merit.....cofty

A chorus led by OUTLAW..LOL!!..

You don`t have a shred of evidence,you never have..

if you could have proven "No God" you would be World Famous..

News agencys and scientists from around the world would beat a path to your door..

They haven`t..

Nobody knows who you are....You remain a nobody in the Scientific and Religious World..LOL!!..

.

Your so desperate to try and prove "No God"..

You`ve even misrepresented Richard Dawkins as an Atheist all these years,in an effort to prop up your faith..

You`ve verbally beaten people up for even suggesting Richard Dawkins was an agnostic..

Then we read his own words,Richard Dawkins considers himself agnostic..LOL!!

.

You were Wrong as a JW.....You were Wrong as a Baptist.....You`re Wrong about Richard Dawkins..

You have a 100% track record of Being Wrong..

Your a Smug Rabid Atheist Zealot Preacher..Who`s replaced his Faith and Ministry 3 times..LOL!!

Only a Fool would Follow you..

The Case for Theism

Share this