1818 replies to this topic

[The Brain]

If there was any evidence of god it should have taken one post


One post only

[shadowhawk]

If there was any evidence of god it should have taken one post


One post only

God who made the heavens and the earth can be explined in one post!!!  Sure, how about "I am that I am."  God is.  How about that as one post? 

[The Brain]

The above post contains no evidence of god

Oh well...

[shadowhawk]

You wanted to restrict the evidence to one post but then you complain that it is to short.     You are blowing smoke.  Let me ask you, since  you know, what is evidence?  Again. WHAT IS EVIDENCE?  Your turn.

[The Brain]

I had my turn


You've had 55 pages and can't provide evidence

Are you trying to convince others of evidence or yourself

If there was evidence of god, we'd all already know about it

[cats_lover]

 

 

54 pages of nonsense and still no evidence of god.


Oh well...

 

I can not say that the 54 pages of the thread are nonsense because i dont read every single post...

 

Anyway, even from the scientific point of view, the existence of God is something that can not be proven (or refuted), from the logical point of view, its existence is an unfalsifiable argument.
 

Of course, for some people is more or less reasonable to believe in its existence, but in this case we do not have the help of science; and this is what makes this question so hard to deal with.

 

Science is tnot capable of answering questions about God or atheism for that matter.  You can't prove science by science.  It has many limitations which I have pointed out before.  Science cannot help us answer many questions of truth.  Science is not the sole source of truth.

 

 

This is a big mismatch because most people in this forum are scientific thought people (also me), and by evidence they understand scientific/logic evidence. We agree that there is no scientific evidence pro or against God existence (while fine tuning could be considerer logical evidence, but this is other issue).

[shadowhawk]

cats_lover:  This is a big mismatch because most people in this forum are scientific thought people (also me), and by evidence they understand scientific/logic evidence. We agree that there is no scientific evidence pro or against God existence (while fine tuning could be considerer logical evidence, but this is other issue).

I also am scientifically minded but Science is not the only way to truth.  It is limited.  I have said it a thousand times, “SCIENCE IS A PROCESS NOT A POSITION.”  Positions are usually wrong as history shows us with thousands of failed “Scientific” views.  Science is philosophical at roots and is itself not the conclusion of the scientific process.  In other words, science itself is not proven scientifically ti be the only way to truth. Anyone who has studied the Philosophy of Science quickly recognizes this.  This is scientism not science.  So What is evidence?  Is the only evidence scientific and if so how is science evidence?  Who proved it is the only way to truth.

What is evidence?

[shadowhawk]

I had my turn


You've had 55 pages and can't provide evidence

Are you trying to convince others of evidence or yourself

If there was evidence of god, we'd all already know about it

 

Just as I thought, nothing.  What is evidence?  You don't have a clue.  If you knew what evidence was you would say so.  Have a nice day. 
 

[Lewis Carroll]

 

If there was any evidence of god it should have taken one post


One post only

God who made the heavens and the earth can be explined in one post!!!  Sure, how about "I am that I am."  God is.  How about that as one post? 

 

 

Ahh, there is the evidence I've been waiting for! Now, there is no doubt that God exists. (pun intended)

 

I consistently have the same quote jump into my head while reading your posts:

"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of the truth than lies"

 

Someone else called you out about this recently; are you trying to convince others of Christianity's legitimacy or yourself?

[shadowhawk]

Majin Brain:  Ahh, there is the evidence I've been waiting for! Now, there is no doubt that God exists. (pun intended)
I consistently have the same quote jump into my head while reading your posts:
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of the truth than lies"
Someone else called you out about this recently; are you trying to convince others of Christianity's legitimacy or yourself?

Typical.  Since you do not know what “evidence” is and all you can do is personal attacks, have a nice day.

[The Brain]

I had my turn


You've had 55 pages and can't provide evidence

Are you trying to convince others of evidence or yourself

If there was evidence of god, we'd all already know about it

Just as I thought, nothing. What is evidence? You don't have a clue. If you knew what evidence was you would say so. Have a nice day.

You're beat


Oh well...

[shadowhawk]

 

What is evidence.  For those ignorant of what it is.  We have gone through this before but some who claim there is no evidence are just blowing smoke.  We have presented lots of evidence while the detractors have presented little.  See:

http://www.longecity...-51#entry682966

 

 

 

Edited by shadowhawk, 29 October 2014 - 07:27 PM.

[The Brain]

Clearly it's you having trouble with what evidence is, you haven't supplied any.

You've had 55 pages to try yet you're still struggling.

This thread has not given evidence of god.

Not will it ever

[shadowhawk]

You haven't a clue what evidence is. but you, like a child keep saying. where is the evidence."  I have given a good faith effort to show you but I am just being played.  Here is my last attempt.

 

Evidence
Evidence, broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion.  It can be testimonial - statements or the spoken or written word from the witness(es).  It can be Physical -  consisting of tangible things you can see touch smell or taste.  Articles such as hairs, fibers, latent fingerprints and biological material are physical.

Evidence can come from a document, object or event.

Evidence may come from an eye witness.

Evidence can come from experts, someone who has studied the subject.

Evidence may be hearsay.  Someone else saw it.

Evidence may be Circumstantial or indirect.  In an important sense, however, all evidence is  circumstantial because no evidence can prove a fact in the absence of one or more inferences.  Absolute proof does not exist.

Evidence can be historical facts.  It nay either be Primary evidence or Secondary evidence.  Primary evidence is evidence that actually comes from the time being studied.  Secondary evidence is is evidence that does not come from the time being studied.  The Bible is primary evidence.  A movie on the life of Christ is secondary.  The more sources the better for historical evidence.  Events only happen once.  Then they become history.
http://www.apologeti...=10&article=187
 http://www.westarkch...trabiblical.htm

Evidence may be reasoned or logical.  It can be argued.

Statistical evidence.  Numbers.

[The Brain]

We'll move away from word chess shall we, seeing as you have to resort to that.

No proof of god

No belief of god

You haven't changed a thing

You've spent 55 pages of nonsense to play on the technicalities of a word.

Oh well

[shadowhawk]

I am glad you agree with me now.

[The Brain]

I'm glad you agree you've presented no proof...

[shadowhawk]

No I agree you don't have a clue what evidence is and you don't want to know.  You don't care what the word "evidence<" means so there is no use playing the skeptic game, "why."  You can't convince a blind man the wall is red.  OK, I am going on.  Let me summarize the evidence so far next.

[The Brain]

Oh oh, hit a nerve

Oh well...

[serp777]

No I agree you don't have a clue what evidence is and you don't want to know.  You don't care what the word "evidence<" means so there is no use playing the skeptic game, "why."  You can't convince a blind man the wall is red.  OK, I am going on.  Let me summarize the evidence so far next.

 

Dude I have to admit you are the most persistent troll I've ever seen. You've probably invested hundreds of hours into this thread by now and it's seriously sad. Do you honestly just sit at home all day 24/7 writing "evidence" posts and watch william lane craig videos? Nobody is interested in your online religious crusade; you haven't convinced a single person with any of your arguments. Everyone gets fed up with you and leaves, why do you think it keeps happening?

 

The reply to this will consist of "No content here, provides no evidence, blah blah blah." That's because were not even arguing this topic with you, were just complaining about what a huge troll you are.

[The Brain]

I think his faith has become an illness

Especially when he has to rely upon technicalities of interpretation to support himself

[shadowhawk]

The above two posts are typical with no content.  They are not doing anything but calling names so I will go on.    They have no evidence. 

[shadowhawk]

http://www.longecity...-45#entry678690

[The Brain]

No proof of sky daddy then


Oh well

[shadowhawk]

The parrot again says there is no evidence for God.  Just saying it over and again in the face of Evidence shows how mindless this is.  Here is a video on the subject of evidence and my next post will be the subjects I have delt with in just this last section of difficulties.  The reader can then decide.

 

 

 

 

 

[serp777]

The parrot again says there is no evidence for God.  Just saying it over and again in the face of Evidence shows how mindless this is.  Here is a video on the subject of evidence and my next post will be the subjects I have delt with in just this last section of difficulties.  The reader can then decide.

 

 

No one is reading your infinite diatribe, sorry to break it to you. The only people who partially read this thread precede to argue with you.

[The Brain]

Oh oh, name calling, how immature, who would've thought you would have stooped to that level

As for just saying stuff over and over, you're 55 pages ahead of me so far, it's fair you give me a chance to catch up isn't it ?

Still no proof of god though...

[serp777]

The above two posts are typical with no content.  They are not doing anything but calling names so I will go on.    They have no evidence. 

 

Again nobody cares; your useless posts aren't persuading a single person.

 

cats_lover:  This is a big mismatch because most people in this forum are scientific thought people (also me), and by evidence they understand scientific/logic evidence. We agree that there is no scientific evidence pro or against God existence (while fine tuning could be considerer logical evidence, but this is other issue).

I also am scientifically minded but Science is not the only way to truth.  It is limited.  I have said it a thousand times, “SCIENCE IS A PROCESS NOT A POSITION.”  Positions are usually wrong as history shows us with thousands of failed “Scientific” views.  Science is philosophical at roots and is itself not the conclusion of the scientific process.  In other words, science itself is not proven scientifically ti be the only way to truth. Anyone who has studied the Philosophy of Science quickly recognizes this.  This is scientism not science.  So What is evidence?  Is the only evidence scientific and if so how is science evidence?  Who proved it is the only way to truth.

What is evidence?

 

 

history shows us thousands of failed religions.
 

 

cats_lover:  This is a big mismatch because most people in this forum are scientific thought people (also me), and by evidence they understand scientific/logic evidence. We agree that there is no scientific evidence pro or against God existence (while fine tuning could be considerer logical evidence, but this is other issue).

I also am scientifically minded but Science is not the only way to truth.  It is limited.  I have said it a thousand times, “SCIENCE IS A PROCESS NOT A POSITION.”  Positions are usually wrong as history shows us with thousands of failed “Scientific” views.  Science is philosophical at roots and is itself not the conclusion of the scientific process.  In other words, science itself is not proven scientifically ti be the only way to truth. Anyone who has studied the Philosophy of Science quickly recognizes this.  This is scientism not science.  So What is evidence?  Is the only evidence scientific and if so how is science evidence?  Who proved it is the only way to truth.

What is evidence?

 

 

And evidence is that which you do not have. I think that's a pretty solid definition.

[shadowhawk]

There are more parrots all saying the same thing over and over, which is nothing. 

 

Evidence
Evidence, broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion.  It can be testimonial - statements or the spoken or written word from the witness(es).  It can be Physical -  consisting of tangible things you can see touch smell or taste.  Articles such as hairs, fibers, latent fingerprints and biological material are physical.

Evidence can come from a document, object or event.

Evidence may come from an eye witness.

Evidence can come from experts, someone who has studied the subject.

Evidence may be hearsay.  Someone else saw it.

Evidence may be Circumstantial or indirect.  In an important sense, however, all evidence is  circumstantial because no evidence can prove a fact in the absence of one or more inferences.  Absolute proof does not exist.

Evidence can be historical facts.  It nay either be Primary evidence or Secondary evidence.  Primary evidence is evidence that actually comes from the time being studied.  Secondary evidence is is evidence that does not come from the time being studied.  The Bible is primary evidence.  A movie on the life of Christ is secondary.  The more sources the better for historical evidence.  Events only happen once.  Then they become history.
http://www.apologeti...=10&article=187
 http://www.westarkch...trabiblical.htm

Evidence may be reasoned or logical.  It can be argued.

Statistical evidence.  Numbers.

[The Brain]

The above post contains nothing but parroting


Oh well...