About Us ThisisBigBrother.com

17-03-2014, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Livia

The burden of proof only applies within a court of law. You can't apply it to every day discussions, it's ridiculous. No one has to prove themselves because you demand it because we have religious freedom in this country... which means I am free to worship in my own way, and you're free to do your own thing... or nothing.

This thread isn't a discussion about whether or not God exists, and trust the Atheists to drag it down to that.

You're questioning me about a post I replied to, asking for proof that there isn't a god?

I didn't bring up anything in this thread relating to religion, and at no point have I ever tried to tell anyone what they can or can't believe, so trust religious people to rush to be offended where there is no need to be.

I have no issues with anyone who has faith, but I think I'm within my rights to point out logical impossibilities. I don't mean about the existence of god, I mean whether it is possible to prove a negative.

You missed the point with my post completely. The guy with religion was asking for proof - not the atheist.

the truth · 17-03-2014, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jesus.

We've had this discussion before - it's impossible to prove a negative. The burden of proof isn't with those that say there isn't a god, it's solely with those that say there is.

you cant prove it and I cant prove otherwise

Crimson Dynamo · 17-03-2014, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the truth

you cant prove it and I cant prove otherwise

yes like the loch ness monster and an infinite number of fictitious things

what part of this do you not get?

Livia · 17-03-2014, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jesus.

You're questioning me about a post I replied to, asking for proof that there isn't a god?

I didn't bring up anything in this thread relating to religion, and at no point have I ever tried to tell anyone what they can or can't believe, so trust religious people to rush to be offended where there is no need to be.

I have no issues with anyone who has faith, but I think I'm within my rights to point out logical impossibilities. I don't mean about the existence of god, I mean whether it is possible to prove a negative.

You missed the point with my post completely. The guy with religion was asking for proof - not the atheist.

I am not in a rush to be offended. I'm not offended at all. And anyone can reply to any post, I don't have to wait for you to address me directly.

You replied to the "guy with religion", who was replying to Arista... who made the original [rather off-topic post]. Anyone can reply to anyone. Arista said "there is no God". thetruth said "prove it". I suspect thetruth was being ironic because it's a constant request from Atheists for people of faith to offer some proof, demonstrating that they just can't get a handle on the "faith" thing.

I was questioning your "burden of proof" comment. No one has to prove anything; religious people don't have to prove there is a God, Atheists don't have to prove there isn't. The burden of proof does not apply here.

Livia · 17-03-2014, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

yes like the loch ness monster and an infinite number of fictitious things

what part of this do you not get?

"Faith". You either get it, or you don't. If you don't, no amount of explaining will make you get it.

Crimson Dynamo · 17-03-2014, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Livia

"Faith". You either get it, or you don't. If you don't, no amount of explaining will make you get it.

I know what faith is, its like believing that man U will get 4th spot this season.

It wont happen, there is no evidence that it will and to think that you must be mad

and yet, tons of man u fans still believe

the truth · 17-03-2014, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

I know what faith is, its like believing that man U will get 4th spot this season.

It wont happen, there is no evidence that it will and to think that you must be mad

and yet, tons of man u fans still believe

no its not like that whatsoever its sad how little you understand it

17-03-2014, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Livia

I am not in a rush to be offended. I'm not offended at all. And anyone can reply to any post, I don't have to wait for you to address me directly.

You replied to the "guy with religion", who was replying to Arista... who made the original [rather off-topic post]. Anyone can reply to anyone. Arista said "there is no God". thetruth said "prove it". I suspect thetruth was being ironic because it's a constant request from Atheists for people of faith to offer some proof, demonstrating that they just can't get a handle on the "faith" thing.

I was questioning your "burden of proof" comment. No one has to prove anything; religious people don't have to prove there is a God, Atheists don't have to prove there isn't. The burden of proof does not apply here.

It's an argument the truth has used before, so I sincerely doubt there was any irony there at all - but yet again you've missed the point.

If one side posits that something exists - albeit in whatever language and allegories people wish to use, then they are making claims that should have evidence, or could be at least tested or proved.

Now, whilst I have no issue of people with faith because they believe, it doesn't mean that they get a free pass in the logic department

That was the only point I was making, and as for this not being a court of law, thus negating any need for any burden of proof, religion continues to this day to make scientific claims about the world and nature that under no circumstance can be viewed using the scientific method. Cuz...y'know...faith innit, and we don't get it. Faith to me is believing in things for which there is no evidence, not some free pass from the mystical realm afforded to only a few of us.

I had issues with the logic in truths post, not that he has faith. It's pretty simple.

Nedusa · 17-03-2014, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jesus.

It's an argument the truth has used before, so I sincerely doubt there was any irony there at all - but yet again you've missed the point.

If one side posits that something exists - albeit in whatever language and allegories people wish to use, then they are making claims that should have evidence, or could be at least tested or proved.

Now, whilst I have no issue of people with faith because they believe, it doesn't mean that they get a free pass in the logic department

That was the only point I was making, and as for this not being a court of law, thus negating any need for any burden of proof, religion continues to this day to make scientific claims about the world and nature that under no circumstance can be viewed using the scientific method. Cuz...y'know...faith innit, and we don't get it. Faith to me is believing in things for which there is no evidence, not some free pass from the mystical realm afforded to only a few of us.

I had issues with the logic in truths post, not that he has faith. It's pretty simple.

the truth · 17-03-2014, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jesus.

It's an argument the truth has used before, so I sincerely doubt there was any irony there at all - but yet again you've missed the point.

If one side posits that something exists - albeit in whatever language and allegories people wish to use, then they are making claims that should have evidence, or could be at least tested or proved.

Now, whilst I have no issue of people with faith because they believe, it doesn't mean that they get a free pass in the logic department

That was the only point I was making, and as for this not being a court of law, thus negating any need for any burden of proof, religion continues to this day to make scientific claims about the world and nature that under no circumstance can be viewed using the scientific method. Cuz...y'know...faith innit, and we don't get it. Faith to me is believing in things for which there is no evidence, not some free pass from the mystical realm afforded to only a few of us.

I had issues with the logic in truths post, not that he has faith. It's pretty simple.

I think your using sarah palin a little too heavily in your Christian consensus. I nor any Christians I know believe the earth is flat and I fully support science
Its also important to note vast numbers of scientists were religious themselves and it in no way conflicted with their scientific studies. as you have inadvertantly pointed out, values as discussed and debated over throughout the new testament is a seperate issues from science so the 2 are not necessarily at odds with each other and are not inextricably linked. You can be a good Christian and still unlock the secrets of science.