Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-04-2010, 03:18 PM
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
(12-04-2010 03:03 PM)panflutejedi Wrote:  Hello Everyone,

I am new here, and I am looking forward to communicating with some real thinking people for a change.Smile

As for proof, I think Richard Dawkins made a fine observation concerning this: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". So, in the absence of such evidence (from whatever side of the discussion), it is entirely possible to conclude this business of the question of a grand deity's existence.

Rationality's evidence: all accumulated, mutually-supporting, and independently verifiable knowledge, data and evidence wrested from our world and universe by courageous thinkers and researchers on many fronts over the previous millenia.

Conclusion for the rationality camp: possessing of mountains of extraordinary evidence.

Religion's evidence: personal (unverifiable) stories of prayers being answered, personal (unverifiable) stories of "hearing" or "seeing" God, as well as writings and books of dubious veracity and unclear authorship, loaded from cover to cover with internal inconsistencies, easily identifiable even for a discerning layman.

Conclusion for the religion camp: no reliable evidence whatsoever, let alone extraordinary evidence.

Go where the evidence, data, and accumulated knowledge leads, and the conclusion becomes clear.

Problem solved.

Welcome, and trust me, we have tried explaining it.

It's a pity that Martin bowed out, I think I was getting somewhere with him. By all means Martin, if I am incorrect, please correct me, but I think what he is saying is what we are saying just a step further. I think he means that we try to say for certain there is absolutely no way a god could exist, we will need evidence, which is true. However, it's a rather moot point, since we act as though it true(That there is no god) in the absence of proof for a god. That is the only way I can rationalize what he has said.

I don't believe Jesus is the son of God until I see the long form birth certificate!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-04-2010, 03:31 PM
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
Welcome to TTAF, panflutejedi!

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-04-2010, 03:40 PM
 
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
Hello Ashley.Hunt,

Thank you for your welcome!Smile

The default stance (there is no god) is inevitably where the evidence leads, true.

A few weeks ago, I had an encounter with a couple of Christians, who openly declared that God exists, and he will punish me for my unbelief. My response? We were walking on a bike trail at the edge of town, so I flung my arms wide, and at the top of my lungs shrieked, "O Lord, come to the aid of your devout and faithful followers, and strike this abomination down with righteous fury, so that they may know that you are the Lord!!!!!"

I looked up, to each side, in the woods, towards the lake, and every other direction. When it became clear that no divine justice was forthcoming, I asked them, "What is your god waiting for?"

Silence, punctuated by the twittering of birds, was their only reply.Cool
Quote this message in a reply
12-04-2010, 04:27 PM
 
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
(12-04-2010 03:18 PM)ashley.hunt60 Wrote:  
(12-04-2010 03:03 PM)panflutejedi Wrote:  Hello Everyone,

I am new here, and I am looking forward to communicating with some real thinking people for a change.Smile

As for proof, I think Richard Dawkins made a fine observation concerning this: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". So, in the absence of such evidence (from whatever side of the discussion), it is entirely possible to conclude this business of the question of a grand deity's existence.

Rationality's evidence: all accumulated, mutually-supporting, and independently verifiable knowledge, data and evidence wrested from our world and universe by courageous thinkers and researchers on many fronts over the previous millenia.

Conclusion for the rationality camp: possessing of mountains of extraordinary evidence.

Religion's evidence: personal (unverifiable) stories of prayers being answered, personal (unverifiable) stories of "hearing" or "seeing" God, as well as writings and books of dubious veracity and unclear authorship, loaded from cover to cover with internal inconsistencies, easily identifiable even for a discerning layman.

Conclusion for the religion camp: no reliable evidence whatsoever, let alone extraordinary evidence.

Go where the evidence, data, and accumulated knowledge leads, and the conclusion becomes clear.

Problem solved.

Welcome, and trust me, we have tried explaining it.

It's a pity that Martin bowed out, I think I was getting somewhere with him. By all means Martin, if I am incorrect, please correct me, but I think what he is saying is what we are saying just a step further. I think he means that we try to say for certain there is absolutely no way a god could exist, we will need evidence, which is true. However, it's a rather moot point, since we act as though it true(That there is no god) in the absence of proof for a god. That is the only way I can rationalize what he has said.

I didn't bow out, I am waiting for an acceptable time for everyone. Maybe we can record it and post a link.
Quote this message in a reply
12-04-2010, 05:44 PM
 
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
(12-04-2010 03:07 PM)supermanlives1973 Wrote:  
(11-04-2010 11:18 AM)martinb59 Wrote:  To put this to rest for the last time, and for those who have nothing better to do! I propose a live debate on the following fallacies, ad hominem, burden of proof, argument from authority. We can read the definitions based on what the experts say of each. Unbeliever and myself can make our comments. Super I looked it up and work for an IT firm, if you could set that up I would appreciate it.

Just because I work for an IT firm doesn't mean I have access to such technology.

You want to prove Unbeliever wrong, you set it up.

Hmmmm, an IT firm that does not about skype, meet me now,go to meeting, or the like, or does not know what the best way to get a bunch of internet users across the world together to discuss an issue, what does IT stand for?
Quote this message in a reply
12-04-2010, 05:45 PM
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
I can do pretty much any time after 3:00 EST.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-04-2010, 05:50 PM
 
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
(11-04-2010 11:07 PM)kidl33t Wrote:  I would like to see this debate. I've read 4 pages of retarded bickering. I would like to see Unbeliever finish Martin once and for all.

I have a 5:1 bet that Martin tries to force a distraction tactic like naming Hitler withing the first 20 minutes!

Sorry that peoples responses are retarded, it is out of my control, but what you said will not happen, I will use what they call "The Back of the Book Technique" I will tell anyone WHO CARES, how I will defeat Unbeliever ahead of time. I will give everyone exactly what I will say highlighted, he can tell me nothing about his position if he chooses, and we will see what happens. Can't get more fair than that, I will use what he has quoted and sited and I will give that to him as far in advance as he wants to review it.
(12-04-2010 05:45 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  I can do pretty much any time after 3:00 EST.

Me too, I am GMT -7
(09-04-2010 05:27 AM)supermanlives1973 Wrote:  
Quote:1. I will grant that there were prophets during that time.

Given, many religions have their prophetic proponents (look at Joseph Smith for the Mormon religion; Muhammad for Islam)

Quote:2. You said there is NO evidence to support the existence of a historical Jesus. Super just linked a debate where the atheist, with impressive credentials, had no problem in admitting that Jesus existed. The idea that there is no evidence to support Jesus, whether you believe Jesus existed or not, is just as stupid as saying that the sky is green.

You accuse me of not watching the Ehrman vs. Craig debate on whether Jesus rose from the dead. However, as you have constantly done in previous posts, you have cherry picked the parts that would help your argument.

At about 00:32:00 into the video, Ehrman states that the 'resurrection' can be viewed in two ways: historically and theologically. Theologically, the resurrection story can be true, but I attest theologically to mythologically, meaning that it is great as a story, but untrue. Historically, Ehrman states, "historians can only state what PROBABLY happened in the past. The problem with historians is they can't repeat the experiment..." he continues on talking about if we want proof today for something, we go into the sciences to prove things.

So, tell me martin, have you conducted any 'resurrection' experiments? Know of anyone who has? Has a resurrection, other than one claimed by you and a billion other Christians, ever been proven that it has occurred again (and I'm not counting mythological stories of Mithra, Horus, etc. etc). I'm talking about a human being, dead, coming back to life after being DEAD for 3 days.

Quote:3. Obviously your argument is fallacious and should not be taken seriously.

I will side with Unbeliever and Ashley on the burden of proof. They way I read it is simple: Christians make the claim (especially around Easter, BTW) that Christ has risen. Show me the proof.

If Christ/God want to make their presence known, then why don't they/he? The argument I hear from Christians is 'you have to believe in god to KNOW god, etc., etc.' But, if mankind were created BY god, then he should show himself to ALL human beings, regardless of their denomination of faith.

Let's take a personal example...

I have two boys, aged 6 1/2 and (almost) 3. For the sake of secrecy, let's call them Logan and Clark.

Logan professes his undying commitment to me, on a daily basis. I recognize this and, although a bit uncomfortable at times, I accept it. Logan is an important child because he confirms my existence and my authority on a daily basis. If I ask Logan to do something, he does it without question.

Clark, on the other hand, professes his undying commitment to his mother, on a daily basis. Although I have attempted many times to get him to do what I want, he 'blasphemes' against me by worshipping his mother instead of me. He wouldn't care a single bit if I wasn't even around.

Now, in my example above, would it be right of me to disown/ignore Clark's existence, simply because he doesn't worship me like Logan does? Again, this is a purely personal, human-being laden example. This is the way I view a Christian's claim...

If there is a god (which, based on the sheer lack of evidence of such a being, there PROBABLY isn't...not making a truth claim here), I don't see the reason why he/she/it won't reveal itself to the world to 'put to rest' the whole god debate once and for all.

Look forward to your (logical, non-personal attack) response.

This is your quote "Now, in my example above, would it be right of me to disown/ignore Clark's existence, simply because he doesn't worship me like Logan does? Clark exists, so it would be stupid to ignore his existence he is sitting right in front of you. Your choice to disown him is up to you, people do it all the time, they have to be over 18, so you couldn't do it with kids that age.
Quote this message in a reply
12-04-2010, 08:24 PM
 
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
Hence my point about YOUR god...if he does exist, then he should make himself present to me as much as he does to you. I would be a maverick child, but I would still be a human that god 'created'.

This statement could be used to argue against the existence of god, since god doesn't show him/herself to 'non-believers' and, for those that claim he has 'shown' himself to, we only have personal experiences to draw from (BTW, I don't buy the whole 'god's shown himself to millions of people' argument...each one of those is a personal experience which cannot be confirmed by outside analysis).

Regardless, if god did exist, he should reveal himself to anyone and everyone, regardless of belief, regardless of denomination, sexual preference, skin color, nationality, etc., etc., etc. If we are his creation (as your bible states), then any differences BETWEEN us are irrelevant...we are all human beings.

Do you see now why I don't believe a god exists?
Quote this message in a reply
12-04-2010, 09:55 PM
 
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
(12-04-2010 05:45 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  I can do pretty much any time after 3:00 EST.

Pick a time and day so I can put you to bed once and for all.
(12-04-2010 08:24 PM)supermanlives1973 Wrote:  Hence my point about YOUR god...if he does exist, then he should make himself present to me as much as he does to you. I would be a maverick child, but I would still be a human that god 'created'.

This statement could be used to argue against the existence of god, since god doesn't show him/herself to 'non-believers' and, for those that claim he has 'shown' himself to, we only have personal experiences to draw from (BTW, I don't buy the whole 'god's shown himself to millions of people' argument...each one of those is a personal experience which cannot be confirmed by outside analysis).

Regardless, if god did exist, he should reveal himself to anyone and everyone, regardless of belief, regardless of denomination, sexual preference, skin color, nationality, etc., etc., etc. If we are his creation (as your bible states), then any differences BETWEEN us are irrelevant...we are all human beings.

Do you see now why I don't believe a god exists?

1. How would you like for God to make Himself known to you?

2. You are only a "maverick child" if you don't come back. You have kids, there may be a point when you will have to say "I don't agree with your behaviour, and I don't want you in my house" but you will totally accept them back in your house if they stop doing the things you don't like.

3. "Regardless, if god did exist, he should reveal himself to anyone and everyone, regardless of belief, regardless of denomination, sexual preference, skin color, nationality, etc., etc., etc. If we are his creation (as your bible states), then any differences BETWEEN us are irrelevant...we are all human beings." God has revealed Himself to 2.1 billion that your are put of the 250 to 500 million is no ones fault but your own. Save the ad populum doesn't apply.
Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2010, 05:51 AM
RE: Burdon of proof HOPEFULLY once and for all!
Whenever's good for you. I don't have a preference, and I don't know your schedule. I know that I don't have anything scheduled for later in the week, but I don't want to inconvenience you. It's your choice.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: