God & the Fairy Tree

You still have not said anything.There are many claims and so far you have offered no support for any of them.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

The onus is not on me to prove anything. I can assert my own position to the initial claim that God created all things, but beyond that, the claim was stated and the evidence has been accounted for. As frustrations mount under the strain of this argument, it should be noted that "some of us" will struggle with the implications. While I did raise the subject, I did not write the claim, nor did I ever take the responsibility for it. However, the claim was made, and the evidence is accounted for. And I stress, it is... what it is, and despite our best efforts we remain unable to transform it.It is sheer arrogance which drives us to the edge of such problems. In the past, great minds, people of fame, which have laid the foundations of science have struggled with this very same statement. Don't feel bad or battered over this, you are not alone.We can openly reject the claim without challenging it. I doubt this would amount to a resolution but it does remain an option nonetheless. Edited by pbee, : typosEdited by AdminPD, : Warning

What evidence? So far you have presented NO evidence for the claim.How many times must that be pointed out?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Wrong. The onus to support a claim is ALWAYS on the person making the claim. You assert the universe was created. Support your assertion or concede. Stating that the universe exists is NOT evidence it was created. If you claim the Bible as evidence it was created by the Abrahamic God, tell us why the Bible is correct and other, older ancient religious texts are incorrect, as they are mutually exclusive. You have, in fact, asserted that the universe was created. By mentioning it here, you do in fact take responsibility for providing the evidence to support it. The evidence has NOT been accounted for - you have given nothing but circular reasoning, and have been shown this repeatedly by multiple posters. Frustrations are not mounting over this argument, pbee - people are simply growing very tired of repeating themselves to you. Appeal to authority - a logical fallacy. "Great minds, people of fame" are irrelevant. All that matters are the merits of any argument, regardless of who put the argument forth.And stop with the "don't feel bad" bullshit. None of us are feeling inadequate in any way. Id respond further to the implicit insult of such statements, but I'd rather not be suspended. The claim is rejected because it has been challenged and left undefended by you. Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

---

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

You are way ahead of yourself with this line of reasoning. The claim was that God created all things. It was found written in a stone tablet. I have "NOT" seen it myself, however I did not write it nor did I make the claim that I created all things in existence...The rest of your post was residual to this statement. Edited by pbee, : No reason given.Edited by pbee, : No reason given.Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

First off: what stone tablet? Can you provide a link to information about it?Second: If you bring the claim to a debate, YOU must support it. What you're saying is like an evolutionist saying he doesn't need to support his claims because Darwin made them first. If you're not going to debate, stop posting in a debate forum. Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

---

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

you guys totally jacked Para's thread

Just as you replied I saw this typo "I did NOT see it myself, however.... " - it has been repaired now.I stress(again)...I never claimed anything. I pointed out that all things known to us have been claimed by God. This is a well known claim which has been recorded and made available to us throughout history. The debate was never whether or not "I could logically prove" this statement. I would be forced to say I don't truly care.Your right, an evolutionists could support his or her claim to evolution, however he would not be claiming anything beyond having the knowledge and understanding of the process of evolution. There is a substantial difference between the claim to having made all matter and the understanding of what is and how it came to be.Darwin's work is in no way comparable to God's claims on creation as does evolution for that matter.We have spent considerable time swarming about in the cloud of the initial statement. If anyone wants to contest "The Claim" made by God then so be it. I would be more than happy to share my own research to that effect. However, we will not come to any conclusions within the scope of this thread. Edited by pbee, : No reason given.Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

I think we have a troll on our hands. It seems to me that pbee is less interested in discussing the matter than in posting nonsense and seeing the responses.

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

Agreed. And, as CS noted, if his intent was to get us to completely derail this thread, we've fallen for it.pbee, our line of discussion is wholly off topic for this thread. If you'd like to discuss your point of view further, I suggest you make a new, more appropriate thread. For my part, I will no longer take part in the off-topic discussion.

I would be very interested in discussing this matter but as I mentioned in my previous post, this specific topic has already gone to far. If you are up to the task, then spawn a new discussion and it could be managed properly.

Several million people? I hardly think that's the case.Imagine a small town of Christians. Consider one person born and raised in that town, living there all her life, going to church every Sunday.What are the odds that, continuing to live in that town, she'll completely abandon Christianity and become a committed Buddhist for the rest of her life? Pretty low, I should think. One in a million, perhaps. Why? Well, of course not. (They just think its wrong for all the other religions.)But I don't see what that has to do with what we're talking about. Now it seems like you're defending my position - that adopting a religious faith is usually a matter of going along with the crowd. I've long felt that God would be better compared to Santa Claus:1) Creates things
2) Long white beard
3) Watches over all persons
4) Knows if you've been good or bad
5) Punishes the wicked, rewards the virtuous
6) Answers requests in written or spoken form
7) Able to visit every home in a single night, or even fasterof course, the similarities don't end there - they're both complete make-believe.The only difference between belief in fairies and belief in God is the popularity of the belief. That's not a qualitative difference, it's just a quantitative one.

What a coincidence! I was just browsing around on jhuger's site (of Kiss Hank's Ass fame), and I found a page that seems directly relevant to the OP.Cheers.Added by edit: And another one! Ha ha ha! I'm really not looking for these!Edited by Chiroptera, : No reason given.

---

Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger

Everyone please get back to the topic.Please read Message 1 if a refresher is needed.Please direct any comments concerning this Admin msg to the Moderation Thread.

​

Any response in this thread will receive a 24 hour timeout.Thank you

quote:

---

No of course I don't have all knowledge and of course we can never be 100% sure about things that there is no evidence of.

---

Actually, we can never be 100% sure of anything, no matter how much evidence there is.That's what scientists call tentativity.

quote:

---

But as an educated adult with a working brain I can be pretty damm sure that fairies, ipu's and gods are constructs of the human brain and exist nowhere else.

---

Sure, me too.But that is not the same as knowing, for sure, that they do not exist.

quote:

---

Let's say I'm an atheist about fairies and gods until someone can provide some evidence for their existance. I think its more rational to not believe in things for which no-one has every presented evidence for then to withhold judgement forever.

---

If you would accept evidence for their existence if it was presented to you, then you are not an athiest regarding their existence, you are agnostic regarding their existence.At least, this is how I understand the difference between Atheism and Agnosticism.