OK Atheists.......prove god doesn't exist

Not necessary since you have already crossed the finish line.

 

It is a journey, Jester...not a race.

I hope you make it.

 

And my position with equal consistancy is that it is possible that the Easter Bunny exists and it is also possible that there is no Easter Bunny.

So we are in total agreement that belief in the the Easter Bunny and belief in god are logically equivalent

 

A journey normally has a destination and you have reached it.

 

If you want to talk about the Easter Bunny, go talk to a toddler or a fellow atheist. They both love to talk about the Easter Bunny.

Bottom line, though, is that it is possible that gods exist...and it is possible none do.

 

You talked about "crossed the finish line", Jester. Stop walking away from stuff.

 

So sad that you are unable to actually deal with the Bunny. Perhaps a vampire or similar analogy would work better for you. Or zombies or any other imaginary idea you would prefer.

How about it is possible that the Flying Spaghetti monster exists ... and it is possible that the FSM doesn't exist.

 

Wow...after only a couple hundred posts...you FINALLY come to the realization that you may be able to approach this without the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, or Santa Claus.

Amazing!

Bring an analogy on. Make it an actual analogy...rather than simply throwing out a word or two.

 

I love it.

Hovind's evidence for God...
"You can't know anything unless you know everything and only God knows everything"

 

Summing up security blankets...


ecco (and others)...

• I know Fairies are the creation of man's imaginings. They do not really exist.
• I know PsychicSnowflakes are the creation of man's imaginings. They do not really exist.
• I know Easter Bunnies are the creation of man's imaginings. They do not really exist.
• I know Santa Clauses are the creation of man's imaginings. They do not really exist.
  
• I know Gods are the creation of man's imaginings. They do not really exist.

FrankApisa (and others)......

• I know Fairies are the creation of man's imaginings. However, they may really exist.
• I know PsychicSnowflakes are the creation of man's imaginings. However, they may really exist.
• I know Easter Bunnies are the creation of man's imaginings. However, they may really exist.
• I know Santa Clauses are the creation of man's imaginings. However, they may really exist.
  
• I know Gods are the creation of man's imaginings. However, they may really exist.

 

Complete nonsense on your part, Ecco.

I certainly never said most of the things you mentioned in that last part...and I don't remember anyone else doing it.

In any case, I am only responsible for what I write...and never said any of the things you mentioned in part 2...including that last sentence.

So...why not start over and this time, be real.

 

Anyone who asserts there is unambiguous evidence for a god...is kidding him/herself. Anyone who asserts there is unambiguous evidence that gods do not exist...is kidding him/herself.

I wouldn't do it...and for William to suggest this clip destroys my arguments is as absurd as the other nonsense he try to sell.

 

If you truly comprehended what I just wrote, you would not have responded as you did. Try again.

For the same reason I think the following are silly notions...

• It is possible you are GOD
• It is possible I am GOD
• It is possible all other posters are robots

I'm not in the habit of finding logic in illogical statements or positions. It hurts the brain.

pos·si·bly
ˈpäsəblē/
adverb

1. 1.
   perhaps (used to indicate doubt or hesitancy).

Frank,
I, and others, do understand your position. We really do.

• I'm sure you understand the positions of people who believe the Universe was created in six days.
• I'm sure you understand the positions of people who believe the Earth is flat.
• I'm sure you understand the positions of people who believe god answers prayers.

You understand their positions. But do you agree with them or do you accept the fact that they are just silly notions?

 

Try PsychicSnowflakes. He accepted that analogy in an earlier discussion. He'll now deny it, but he did.

 

You are reduced to absurdity, Ecco...and I truly feel sorry for you on that account. Frankly, it rises to the point of pitying you for it.

Here is what I think is NOT silly:

It is possible that gods exist...it is also possible that there are no gods.

Deal with that rather than doing all that contorting and fabricating...which is going to get you nowhere.

After you deal with the above...we can move on to the "it is more likely" element.

But first deal with the above.

 

Exactly!

The problem is that we understand it only too well and see it for what it is. I'm sure that among 6th graders it is astonishing stuff , but in here, with the grown ups, it just doesn't cut muster.

 

Double post

 

Destination ignorance.

 

Can't prove a negative. Failure to find evidence of a deity implies no deity.

 

What's your problem? I used the word "may". You use the word "possible".

may1
mā/
verb

1. 1.
   expressing possibility.
   "that may be true"

You have stated: Anything that has not been disproved is possible.
You have stated: I don't do "believing".
You have stated: It is possible gods exist.

The only logical extension of that is...
Since Fairies have not been disproved, I know Fairies may really exist.
Since PsychicSnowflakes have not been disproved, I know PsychicSnowflakes may really exist.
Since Easter Bunnies have not been disproved, I know Easter Bunnies may really exist.
Since Santa Clauses have not been disproved, I know Santa Clauses may really exist.
Since Gods have not been disproved, I know Gods may really exist.

I know you hate analogies. The reason you hate analogies is that they clearly show how nonsensical your views are.

 

Note, that the deranged theist in the video uses the self same premise of ignorance as the fundagelical agnostic. Theists and fundagelical agnostics are two sides of the same coin for sure.

 

In summary, adopting ignorance as your guiding principle means that to be consistent you have to give all claims equal credence otherwise you are special pleading. This is clearly absurd and should not be given any further thought by a rational mind.

 

It is possible that PsychicSnowflakes exist...it is also possible that there are no PsychicSnowflakes.

Since you know that it is possible that PsychicSnowflakes exist, you and your arguments are reduced to absurdity.

I don't feel sorry for you at all. I have no pity for you. I have learned long ago that many people have silly notions. I have learned long ago that people will defend their silly notions despite all evidence to the contrary. These people don't warrant pity. Disdain perhaps, but not pity.

 

What the hell are you talking about here?

I have NEVER EVER said that. And I have called that misquote to your attention before.

I have. The reason I have is because I do not do "believing."

I have. The reason I have is because it is possible that gods exist.

Start all that illogical nonsense over again after you get rid of that "disproved" error.

And since I use the term "it is possible gods exist"...why not stick with that wording if you are going to try to make these absurd comparisons?

I hate analogies about as much as you hate trying to correct me. (Now THAT is an analogy.)

 

Theists who insist there is at least one god...and agnostics who insist we do not know if any gods exist or not...are most assuredly not two sides of one coin.

Theists who insist there is at least one god...and atheists who insist there are no gods...

...ARE two sides of one coin.

That seems to bother you, William. I wonder why.