Theological Parodies (Creator, tradition, Revelation, prophet, atheist)

[Scuba Pete]

Originally Posted by Sunstone

Jistyr has a point, though. If we're speaking logically, then the burden of proof is on those who make the claim that something is the case, not on those who criticize the claim.

Sunstone, the claim was made that NOT ONE THEIST had given an answer as to what it would take for them to CHANGE THEIR MIND and repudiate the existence of God. I believe that I am the only one who can tell you what it would take for me. Like it or not, that is the threshold that must be reached for me to begin in any disbelief of God. It has nothing to do with "rules" of debate, but an insight into my psyche.

What did it take for YOU to stop believing in God? Was it a mathematical equation? An epiphany of some sort? Perhaps it was some logical conundrum? Who am I to disagree with you as to what made you deign to disbelieve. Perhaps you NEVER believed, or at least you have convinced yourself of that. In our discussion, let's not skew it so badly as to twist WHAT I said. I do that enough all on my own.

[Sunstone]

Originally Posted by Scuba Pete

Sunstone, the claim was made that NOT ONE THEIST had given an answer as to what it would take for them to CHANGE THEIR MIND and repudiate the existence of God. I believe that I am the only one who can tell you what it would take for me. Like it or not, that is the threshold that must be reached for me to begin in any disbelief of God. It has nothing to do with "rules" of debate, but an insight into my psyche.

What did it take for YOU to stop believing in God? Was it a mathematical equation? An epiphany of some sort? Perhaps it was some logical conundrum? Who am I to disagree with you as to what made you deign to disbelieve. Perhaps you NEVER believed, or at least you have convinced yourself of that. In our discussion, let's not skew it so badly as to twist WHAT I said. I do that enough all on my own.

What has any of what you said got to do with what I said?

[doppelgänger]

Originally Posted by Sunstone

What has any of what you said got to do with what I said?

I think Pete's saying he's not trying to prove anything to anyone and he doesn't need to prove it to himself.

[Scuba Pete]

Perhaps if you were to re-read where the "Prove God does not exist" came in it will become a bit plainer to you. You have to keep up here man. Heck, I am being swarmed by a herd of rabid atheists all trying to get a piece of me, and I am still keeping up.

PS: "rabid swarm" was purely in jest, lest any of my atheists friends think I am trying to dis them. However, I would enjoy some company from my theist friends in here.

[Jistyr]

Originally Posted by Scuba Pete

That's a straw man. You have YET to put up a rational argument.

My argument was that you have the burden of truth. That is a logical argument.
You tried to place the burden on me to disprove God though, and the only reassurance I need is the fact that you cannot prove him.

Originally Posted by Scuba Pete

It is not possible to disprove the truth. Why would I expect you to disprove that?

Truth? I see a concept with absolutely no backing. Not the truth. Don't flatter yourself.

I sense a contradiction.

Originally Posted by Scuba Pete

Radar does not show it to be there. So now I can conclude that there is no Spaceship.

Human planes have the ability to go undetected past radar, a more advanced alien spaceship surely has that ability too.

Originally Posted by Scuba Pete

I have FAITH that none exists.

If 'faith' is all that is required to say something does not exist, why can faith be valid for you, but I must 'disprove' your claim, even when it is you who bears the burden of truth?

Originally Posted by Scuba Pete

As it is, we have many eye witness accounts through out the Old and New Testament that God exists. You want ultimate proof? There is no such thing for ANYTHING and your faith in atheism is way too strong to accept the evidences that God is.Yet, each of us possesses a threshold, whereby once crossed, we will be convinced. Once crossed our ability to accept our position increases as we require less proof to continue in our belief. This is like any inertia of any body.

As I stated in a previous post, how am I supposed to take these eye witness accounts, which surprisingly have only happened to about one individual at a time and have never been caught on film (if they are as plentiful as you suggest), for actual occurrences instead of wishful thinking?

Truthfully, I cannot.

[Sunstone]

Originally Posted by doppelgänger

I think Pete's saying he's not trying to prove anything to anyone and he doesn't need to prove it to himself.

I get it now. Thanks!

[yossarian22]

Originally Posted by Rolling_Stone

I don't like the 'prove me wrong' argument any more than you, but the FSM "parody" assumes that an unfalsifiable idea is not valid.

Scientifically invalid.
Its not an extremely generic assault on everything unfalsifiable.