-->
@Stephen
I have never talked about the burden of proof, not that I can recall anyway. Let me be clear. Theists have the burden of proof. I cannot recall ever saying otherwise. And I don't recall thinking otherwise either.
If you are referring to an interpretation of a fact, then no empirical evidence is not proof, but a deductive argument is not necessarily sound, and yes - dependent on the claim itself, empirical evidence is a proof.
I have never talked about the burden of proof, not that I can recall anyway. Let me be clear. Theists have the burden of proof. I cannot recall ever saying otherwise. And I don't recall thinking otherwise either.
Timid8967 wrote:Butby suggesting that the theist has to make the first move - and thatthey have the burden of proof, we give up our natural place inthings. Let's take it back.
I have never talked about the burden of proof, not that I can recall anyway. Let me be clear. Theists have the burden of proof. I cannot recall ever saying otherwise. And I don't recall thinking otherwise either.How did know that you would point blank deny making statements and comments about burden of proof and where it lays?
Timid8967 wrote:Butby suggesting that the theist has to make the first move - and thatthey have the burden of proof, we give up our natural place inthings. Let's take it back.You must think everyone here was born just minutes ago. There is a lot more to that comment of yours clearly saying that "we" and "us" i.e. theist and non theist, should carry the burden of proof..
I have never talked about the burden of proof, not that I can recall anyway. Let me be clear. Theists have the burden of proof. I cannot recall ever saying otherwise. And I don't recall thinking otherwise either.How did know that you would point blank deny making statements and comments about burden of proof and where it lays?Is that the best you can come up with? Seriously.
Timid8967 wrote: But by suggesting that the theist has to make the first move - and that they have the burden of proof, we give up our natural place in things. Let's take it back. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/1326-how-atheists-debate-religion?page=1&post_number=2020
I did not deny that the theists have the burden of proof.
I said we need to stop being so bloody up ourselves all of the time.
I do think we need to take it back.
I think we do non-theism and atheism a disservice by always putting it on the theist.
Yet, non-theists have the truth.
We don't need to be on the back foot.
It is not me who is the fraud.
I want to see a better dialogue between religious people and non-religious people - and it is persons such as yourself - who give atheists a bad name - dogmatic and stupid.
Um... its also a right that all people have?
You shouldn't have to worry about not being able to afford it
because love is a specific claim that takes certain qualities to actually be there
Furthermore, no, no it isn't because if that were the case, rights would be completely arbitrary
Because with life comes death, it's not limited to kids. Parents could've done something, they had the freewill to not be parents to children they can't support.
our realization of what's necessary or not is certainly not a match of God's understanding
Cause if you live in a place where people starve you can access birth control? Or you would be of a mind to never have sex? Or be forced into sex.
having that emotion is a specific claim
Pretty easy, because its completely dependent on the situation
That's entirely arbitrary, and based on their perspective.
If you want to make any claim regarding god's understanding you necessarily must demonstrate that is different from your understanding.
My claim there wasn't that god doesn't exist, though they don't, it was that the god you are talking about exists only in your mind.
Wrong - because we can actually OBSERVE the traits that one possesses whenever they are loving towards another individual, and whenever that individual claims ot be all-loving, it is especially noticeable.
Um... yes, god is your average joe of making moral decisions, would you like me to list the moral contradictions made by him alphabetically or sequentially? In fact, the god from the bible is below average when it comes to making morally consistent positions, he's terribly inconsistent.
So what do you say to those who believe in a God not depicted in The Bible?
absolute power will absolutely corrupt.
absolute power will absolutely corrupt.