The Creationist's Argument and its Greatest Weakness

[ecco]

I was simply replying to:


I recognize that a number of people had a hand in writing the Bible, but on the other hand, people have attributed their words to the inspiration of a single "person," god. And it would be he, then, who tended to repeat and contradict himself (possible subsequent mistranslations not withstanding).

.

OK. No disagreement there.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Oh really? Because earlier you said this (emphasis mine):


You're almost as bad at keeping your beliefs straight as your Bible is.

Thanks for the correction! When skeptics are wicked (like those on religious forums) they are not only as wicked as other sinners, but more wicked still. Does that help?

 

[BilliardsBall]

And again, instead of addressing the issue, you're still trying to just turn it back around on me. Why is this so difficult for you? You said this stuff was self-evident. It should be much easier for you. You still don't seem to understand that most people don't believe in the same creator and creation story that you do. And you still don't seem to realize the logical fallacy you're making.

I'm still wondering what your evidence is. If you have 200 pieces of evidence, what's taking you so long to present it? How long ago was it that I first asked now? Just saying something is self-evident is not the same thing as actually presenting evidence.
It's not self-evident to me. And it's not self-evident to the millions of people who don't follow your religion.

P.S. You really need to Google "burden of proof." You say the God you worship created the universe and that it's self-evident that this occurred. Burden of proof is yours to demonstrate the veracity of your claim. It's not on me to disprove your beliefs and assertions.

Now you want my 200 pieces of evidence? You don't come across as someone open to the evidence, having rejected my first few offers for this!

By the way, I happen to agree with you 100% that something like Creation should have easily proffered evidence available. So I will make this easier for you--present the evidence that you exist, and we'll go from there--this will help us define the term "evidence."

As you put it, something like your own existence should be fairly simple to prove. Please present the obvious, available evidence that you exist.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Now you want my 200 pieces of evidence? You don't come across as someone open to the evidence, having rejected my first few offers for this!

By the way, I happen to agree with you 100% that something like Creation should have easily proffered evidence available. So I will make this easier for you--present the evidence that you exist, and we'll go from there--this will help us define the term "evidence."

As you put it, something like your own existence should be fairly simple to prove. Please present the obvious, available evidence that you exist.

That is rather hard to do through the internet. Face to face it would only take a hard slap or two before you admitted to the existence of others. Either by word or deed.

 

[BilliardsBall]

That only tells us that your have no clue When it comes to evidence, or should I say reliable evidence. I do agree that evolution is not a barrier to faith.

Your response belies the fact that you implied it was a problem. Read your prior post, too.

 

[BilliardsBall]

You have it backwards. The burden of proof is upon you when you claim "God did it" without any evidence. "God did it" has failed time after time. By your rationale it is just as valid to say "Universe Farting Pixies did it".

All that we see in the universe are events that can and have been explained by science.

if anyone is shifting the goalposts it is you with this argument.

Oh, I asked you because I knew you could not do so, therefore, I will make it easier for you. Prove that you exist and I'll prove God Created. Shouldn't it be "obvious" and "evident" that you exist? Can't we find some immediate evidence that proves you exist?

 

[BilliardsBall]

So you are open to the idea that everything was created LastThursday - correct?

I don't know the Creation Day. Can you tell us what happened, since you were there, Last Thursday?

 

[BilliardsBall]

I think you would agree that...

• Man's imaginings created Zeus.
• Man's imaginings created Athena.
• Man's imaginings created Thor.
• Man's imaginings created Bumba.
• Man's imaginings created Shiva.
• Man's imaginings created Haikili.

So why would you not agree that.

• Man's imaginings created Yeshua.

Yeshua exhibits great love, great logic, fulfills prophecy, spoke words that still resonate and affect us from jurisprudence to the way weddings are conducted, etc., etc.

You might rephrase your argument this way:

Book X is a fraud.
Book Y is a fraud.
Surely, you would be forced to agree that Book Z must be a fraud.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Now you want my 200 pieces of evidence?

Yes. Of course! I would love any evidence! That's what I've been asking you for, for several pages now!

You don't come across as someone open to the evidence, having rejected my first few offers for this!

Really? I'm all about evidence. Good evidence that actually demonstrates what is being claimed.

By the way, I happen to agree with you 100% that something like Creation should have easily proffered evidence available. So I will make this easier for you--present the evidence that you exist, and we'll go from there--this will help us define the term "evidence."

Oh for Pete's sake.

As you put it, something like your own existence should be fairly simple to prove. Please present the obvious, available evidence that you exist.

You've already tried this one on me, and we've already been over this.

Enough with the deflections now. Please present your evidence, if you have any. You claim "creation" by the God you worship is self-evident. So it should be extremely easy to provide the evidence you have so far refused to provide. Otherwise, I will have to take your endless deflections as evidence that you don't have any evidence for your claim.

Do you have evidence for this "self-evident" claim, or not?
I mean, so far all you've managed to do is demonstrate that "creation" by some god(s) is not self-evident.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Oh, I asked you because I knew you could not do so, therefore, I will make it easier for you. Prove that you exist and I'll prove God Created. Shouldn't it be "obvious" and "evident" that you exist? Can't we find some immediate evidence that proves you exist?

What's with all the tap dancing? Is "creation" by the god you worship self-evident or not?
Good grief.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Your response belies the fact that you implied it was a problem. Read your prior post, too.

No, not at all. If one's faith is based upon a superstitious belief, such as creationism, than it can be a barrier to faith, but why base a religion on a concept that has been shown to be wrong? That sounds more like masochism than anything else to me.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Oh, I asked you because I knew you could not do so, therefore, I will make it easier for you. Prove that you exist and I'll prove God Created. Shouldn't it be "obvious" and "evident" that you exist? Can't we find some immediate evidence that proves you exist?

I think therefore I am.

It may be difficult or impossible for creationists to claim the same.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What's with all the tap dancing? Is "creation" by the god you worship self-evident or not?
Good grief.

He has no evidence. All he can do is dance.

 

[ecco]

Oh, I asked you because I knew you could not do so, therefore, I will make it easier for you. Prove that you exist and I'll prove God Created. Shouldn't it be "obvious" and "evident" that you exist? Can't we find some immediate evidence that proves you exist?

As an observer, I find there is evidence that someone or something posting on RF using the name SubductionZone exists.

However, I would need further evidence.


SubductionZone, please provide the answer to the following question.
What is the name of one of the Senators from Idaho?

Please put your answer in a response to this post.


Now, BB, we will await confirmation.

 

[ecco]

ecco said: ↑
So you are open to the idea that everything was created LastThursday - correct?

I don't know the Creation Day. Can you tell us what happened, since you were there, Last Thursday?

I didn't ask what you know. I asked if you were open to the idea that everything was created LastThursday.

It was a simple question. It can be answered with a Yes or a No.

Care to respond?

 

[ecco]

ecco said: ↑
I think you would agree that...

• Man's imaginings created Zeus.
• Man's imaginings created Athena.
• Man's imaginings created Thor.
• Man's imaginings created Bumba.
• Man's imaginings created Shiva.
• Man's imaginings created Haikili.

So why would you not agree that.

• Man's imaginings created Yeshua.

Yeshua exhibits great love, great logic, fulfills prophecy, spoke words that still resonate and affect us from jurisprudence to the way weddings are conducted, etc., etc.

So, you agree that all gods except one are the creations of man's imaginings. You single out one and give your reasons for doing so.

Let's examine your reasoning.
You claim that your god "exhibits great love", but you do not supply any justification for that.

Quite to the contrary, it is written your holy text that your God commanded the death of young men and boys of a defeated army.

He also brutally drowned and buried alive in mudslides all but a few humans and animals. He, according to your scripture, is the greatest mass murderer of all time.

Please explain how these actions "exhibit great love".

Once you address this point we may be able to move on to your other points.

 

[Subduction Zone]

As an observer, I find there is evidence that someone or something posting on RF using the name SubductionZone exists.

However, I would need further evidence.


SubductionZone, please provide the answer to the following question.
What is the name of one of the Senators from Idaho?

Please put your answer in a response to this post.


Now, BB, e will await confirmation.

James Risch.

 

[BilliardsBall]

That is rather hard to do through the internet. Face to face it would only take a hard slap or two before you admitted to the existence of others. Either by word or deed.

Why make the remark a solipsist would make? You ONLY believe in things YOU can see and feel directly? Does Antartica exist?

 

[BilliardsBall]

I think therefore I am.

It may be difficult or impossible for creationists to claim the same.

Ironically, you quote Rene Descartes, a very strong Christian believer.

Additionally, you resort to name calling. Why?

 

[BilliardsBall]

No, not at all. If one's faith is based upon a superstitious belief, such as creationism, than it can be a barrier to faith, but why base a religion on a concept that has been shown to be wrong? That sounds more like masochism than anything else to me.

Who "based a religion on a superstitious belief"? I became a Christian while an old Earther and firm evolutionist.