As promised…. On Jan 24, 10:29 pm, fiddler <[email protected]> wrote: > You seem to have drawn your own conclusions as to what a scientist > would view as evidence. You state repeatedly that my demands -or that > of any scientist- are beyond what may be proven. What do you believe > are "provable" concepts? > > >merely asking what evidence would > > > cause them to change their view exposes the actual thought processes > > and inherent belief structures that result in said strong atheistic > > point of view. > > You pretend to know what it is that an "atheistic" point of view is. > Please enlighten the rest of us. What is an atheistic point of view? > > There is no dogma involved, regardless of how much you wish there to > be one. I do not believe in a god that refuses to be acknowledged by > testable evidence. To say that god wants "believers" rather than > "knowers" is the height of idiocy. Any god as vain as holy books > report him to be (note that they are all male and force restrictions > on women), would readily put some fingerprint on life, earth, or > humanity; yet none has. > > On Jan 23, 10:01 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > For those who make the claim that god does not exist, and assuming > > that their claim is falsifiable, > > > On Jan 23, 9:31 pm, Alan Wostenberg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > What is weird is this atheist notion that God (assuming He exists) > > > would have a duty to people he does not have to grass. The only way > > > one can raise an argument against God from the death of innocents here > > > is if it was supposed to be otherwise. For example: > > > > 1. a caring God would never let innocent grass die > > > 2. but billions of innocent blades of grass died recently in Haiti > > > 3. therefore God is uncaring > > > > The argument does not have the ring of truth in the case of grass. But > > > s/grass/humans/ and many atheists will find it persuasive. Why? > > > > On Jan 23, 4:04 pm, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Alan Wostenberg <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > The haiti disaster did not just kill people. It killed grass, too! > > > > > > But from the fact that grass died, nobody argues God is not. Why do > > > > > they argue that because people died, God is not? > > > > > > As Alexandar Pruss points out inhttp://bit.ly/7sSRUn"We are only > > > > > really bothered by the problem once we deal with critters that are > > > > > conscious and capable of sophisticated lives" Why is this? > > > > > Hmm. You are correct it is an illogical argument to assume there is > > > > no god because people or grass died. What some people think, I > > > > imagine, is that it proves if there is a god he is uncaring or > > > > possibly even cruel. Rather then put myself through the agony of > > > > believing the All Father doesn't give a rat's ass; I'd rather believe > > > > he doesn't exist at all. It's less emotionally taxing. I don't get > > > > angry. > > > > > I think many angry so-called atheists aren't really atheists at all. > > > > They make the claim because they want to punish God and all who > > > > believe. Weird, eh? > > > > > -Don > > > > > > -- > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > > > > Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. > > > > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > > > [email protected]. > > > > > For more options, visit this group > > > > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.-Hidequoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
