This one simple concept is enough to filter every single theist on Earth.

This one simple concept is enough to filter every single theist on Earth.

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Agnostics win.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Atheists*

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        >burden of proof to prove that god doesn’t exist

        Agnostics win.

        is the only logical answer if you really can’t think in abstract terms

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          Math is evidence a creator exists. The burden of proof is on those who claim they know the creator.

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          >burden of proof to prove that god doesn’t exist

          You're falling for the fallacy described in OP by saying that
          The burden of proof is upon the person claiming something exists.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            No it isn't. The burden of proof is on the person claiming. It's literally in the OP pic. You are either illiterate or dishonest.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            If the burden of proof had been applied to the first moron who claimed a skydaddy taled to him, religions would not exist

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >The burden of proof is on the person claiming.
            And theists claim God exists. Theists have the burden.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Atheists claim God doesn't exist. They have a burden of proof. If they can't prove it, then atheism is just a religion without any of the usual benefits.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Atheists claim God doesn't exist.
            Wrong. Try again, dumbass.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Nope, they literally do. There are countless books by the more honest of atheists devoted to proving God doesn't exist. Average atheists tries to hide behind agnosticism because they're not confident in their assertions.

            Then not believing in ghosts and wizards is a religion too

            They can be if you behave as atheists do.

            Thats not how this works. Atheists simply don't believe God exists. The burden of proof is not on them, its on theists to provide evidence to convince them otherwise. "claim God doesn't exist" is a semantic red herring.

            >Atheists simply don't believe God exists.
            See above. This is the bullshit atheists have pushed to make the position seem more moderate. The history of atheism has been the position that there is no God and many have devoted time to proving that. But your average atheist is so stupid, they'll argue a fricking dog is an atheist.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >See above.
            You mean this?
            >Average atheists tries to hide behind agnosticism
            Because that's completely different.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Then not believing in ghosts and wizards is a religion too

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Thats not how this works. Atheists simply don't believe God exists. The burden of proof is not on them, its on theists to provide evidence to convince them otherwise. "claim God doesn't exist" is a semantic red herring.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            That's not how this works. Theists simply don't believe naturalism is true. The burden of proof is not on them, it's on naturalists to provide evidence to convince them otherwise. "claim naturalism isn't true" is a semantic red herring.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Your switcheroo does not work.
            Theists specifically choose to believe in something which defies logical reasoning.
            They don't "don't believe".
            That's where the term comes from to begin with.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Theists specifically choose to believe in something which defies logical reasoning
            Atheist makes yet another claim he will refuse to prove.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Then it means that if I claim that I had sex with your mom 20 years ago, and you reply that I didn't, then I can ask you to prove it.
            As you feasibly can't, it means the only reasonable stance for you on whether I had sex or not with your mom is "I don't know".

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Atheists*

      they dont have sustainable birth rates. the illogical theists win because frick your limp wristed nerd standards of muh proof

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        >muh birth rates
        go to africa then they have the highest birth rates. the civilized world values human talent not numbers.

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          typical smooth brained ubeliever. religion is a winning move because it instills zeal and a reason for existence. its not something a dishonest sophist like u would understand

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        I’m partly colorblind, too. The chart indicates [...]

        Because are people more likely to be Christian than atheists

        >...

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Agnosticism is the only non arrogant and reasonable position on the matter.

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        Atheism*

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Stating that its impossible to know whether God exists or not requires burden of proof too.

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        Agnostics don't claim it is impossible to know. It's literally just
        >we dunno lol, there's not enough evidence either way
        I don't know what radical centrist agnostics you are talking to that are saying it is impossible to know. Most of the time agnostics are just people that don't really care.

  2. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    I have faith in Jesus, not certainty

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Fair enough. A sane man in a sea of autism.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      This. This is what OP doesn't get about religion.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      >I have certainty despite lack of any good reason to have certainty in Jesus, not certainty
      Nonsense.

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        Faith is not certainty

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          Yes it is.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            No, it isn't.
            This is getting ridiculous. Words mean things.
            Faith and certainty have very different meanings.
            Look them up.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Look them up.
            With utmost pleasure.

            Certain: Sure in one's mind, positive; absolutely confident in the truth of something.
            Faith: A conviction about abstractions, ideas, or beliefs, without empirical evidence, experience, or observation.

            Faith is certainty.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Read your definitions again and think about them for longer than ten seconds.

  3. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    >SHOW ME PROOF
    >ok, here, they wrote an entire book about it
    >NO NOT LIKE THAT

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      interesting book. I imagine it's full of verifiable primary sources, experiments that I can independently replicate, or rigid formal proofs deriving from established axioms.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Do you believe in israelite zombies?

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      >that passage where Jesus calls a gentile woman a dog and says he's only selling tickets to heaven to israelites
      Nice book schlomo

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      why should i take that book as proof?

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Scientology must be true, there's a book on it.

  4. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    >SHOW ME PROOF HARRY POTTER IS REAL!
    >ok, here, they wrote an entire 7 books about it
    >NO NOT LIKE THAT

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      >SHOW ME PROOF JULIUS CAESAR EXISTED
      >"Well, there's a bunch of books that-"
      >"HAHAHA, SO HARRY POTTER IS REAL TOO?"

  5. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    I lack belief in naturalism and therefore believe in theism.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      >I chose to follow a faith based philosiphy that results in violent morons instead of an evidence-based philosiphy
      Dumb decision but okay

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        From my position no one has ever been more violent than the nonreligious.

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          >no one has ever been more violent than the nonreligious.
          Yeah man just look at all those Atheist suicide bombers amiright?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            he right you dishonest dolt

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Right about atheist suicide bombers? Pretty sure thats not a thing, pretty sure only theists blow themselves up to take innocent people with them. Pretty sure (you) would rather live in a modern liberal western society if it meant abortion clinics on some street corners vs living in Pakistan where Jihadism regularly results in the deaths of 50 people or more.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >why wont anyone take my narrow autistic bait about muh atheist suicide bombers

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            So you're saying you would rather live in Pakistan? I hear they have no super violent and scary abortion clinics there

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            the Columbine shooters were atheists
            plenty of murderers and serial killers are...not to mention the #1 biggest killers ever in human history Stalin and Mao

            atheists don't blow themselves up because they don't think they'll get anything out of it
            Christians don't since they generally think suicide is a sin no matter what
            It's really only Jihadists who do that. And that is pretty rare these days. You need to update your talking point from 2007 blogs

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous
          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            guess why

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Abortion clinics kill tens of thousands of children for every one person a suicide bomber kills
            Also suicide bombers are all muzzies, what's that got to do with me?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Does killing 30 people tops in a suicide bombing come even close to an atheist abortionist who could do that in a week and continue to live?

  6. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    can't prove a negative
    the question that should be asked: is there a good reason to believe FSM exists? yes/maybe/no
    is there a good reason to beleive God of the Bible exists? absolutely

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Those are just problematic positions. And no, there's no reason to believe the FSM or Christian God exists.

  7. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Another thread where atheists beg the question!? THAT is NOT what I was expecting

  8. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    >God doesn't exist.
    >Prove it.
    >N-no.
    Atheists are fricking stupid, can't even disprove God.
    >muh spaghetti teapot
    Reddit bullshit

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      >t. filtered by Burden of Proof
      You're homosexual, you can't disprove this.

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        Religion is based on feels. Atheism is supposed to be based on facts and logic, yet you can't even disprove God. Fricking pathetic.
        >ur gay!
        You believe there are hundreds of genders. Atheists sure hate showing their proof despite claiming to heckin love science and shit.

  9. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    It's enough to filter every single unverifiable claim maker on earth.
    Including atheists.

  10. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Why are Christians more likely to be prisoners than atheists?

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Gee I wonder

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        guess why

        Why are black people so likely to be Christian?

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          I don’t really know. Why are white people becoming a minority?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Why are white people becoming a minority?
            There's more whites on Earth now than at any other point in history.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Same can be said for Asians, literally any other race as well

            [...]
            [...]
            >...

            Oh I was talking to a crypto israelite, go figure

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Same can be said for Asians, literally any other race as well
            So white genocide isn't actually real?

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        why do you hate colorblind anons such as me?

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          I’m partly colorblind, too. The chart indicates

          Because are people more likely to be Christian than atheists

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Because are people more likely to be Christian than atheists

  11. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    >This one simple concept is enough to filter every single theist on Earth
    You missed the "a" before "theist", OP. Just thought I'd point it out.

  12. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    >God isn't real
    >but my intangible sophist wordplay device is

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      >>but my intangible sophist wordplay device is
      Word salad

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        You’re the laziest poster ever, you don’t argue and then when people get bored of you, you say “no argument?”

        I could never imagine being so devoid of my own ideas and beliefs, that’d I’d benignly criticize others just to make myself feel better. Get well soon

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          This post is full of intangible sophist wordplay devices

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Mathematically prove that claim, because the Burden of Proof is on you now.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            You’re the laziest poster ever, you don’t argue and then when people get bored of you, you say “no argument?”

            I could never imagine being so devoid of my own ideas and beliefs, that’d I’d benignly criticize others just to make myself feel better. Get well soon

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        It makes perfect sense, moron-anon. He's saying that it's pathetic that you're against the belief in God when you believe in the logical fallacies, a tenant that's not based in any kind of proof.

  13. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Oh I was talking to a crypto israelite
    Aaah they crypto israelites just flew over my house!

  14. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    You have a fundamental misunderstanding of religion if you are demanding proof.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      That is just a copout though, religion influences actions; basing your life off of made up stories isn't good

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        That's not the argument of the OP, nor the subject of discussion in this thread until I big leagued it.

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          I don't care, saying that asking for proof about a religion is meaningless is a copout

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            No, it isn't.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            That is just a copout though, religion influences actions; basing your life off of made up stories isn't good

            Yes,it is

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            No, it isn't you numpty.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            You are free to be wrong

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        Atheists always get to this point in the discussion.
        Where they use the big C word: "copout" when the idea of faith is finally explained to them for the 50th time and they begin to glean the slightest understand of what it is referring to. Then they realize they have been acting moronic the entire time arguing over nothing.
        That's when the
        >w-w-well that's just a COPOUT
        sperging commences. But thankfully it is usually the end of the "discussion" since both sides at this point have nothing left of substance to say.

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          It is a copout, saying that you do things because of faith is not good thing, because you can justify anything with that

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Whether things are good or bad in not the topic of this thread. Nor is using religion for justification. You lack philosophical discipline!

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            And you keep avoiding that problem

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            I don't actually care about whether it is a problem or not. I'm an atheist personally. But I hate unrigorous arguments against theism built on false premises. Which is what the OP has done.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            I don't see how it is a false premise
            >repent now! Jesus is coming
            >can you prove that?
            It seems a normal reaction to someone claiming something

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          How is wanting to proof to believe a religion missing the point? Are you missing the point that believing things without proof and basing your life off of that is irrational?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            If you had proof a religion was true then it would no longer be a religion.
            It would be a scientific fact.
            It is impossible to prove any religion because belief without evidence is a fundamental trait of religion.

            It's akin to demanding someone to show you a triangle without three sides.
            It's a nonsensical request to begin with.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            You are mostly correct, except in your first point. Something being true does not make it a scientific fact. For example, you are a person. That's not a scientific fact, because the concept of personhood is not something defined by science.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >That's not a scientific fact
            It is.
            Because science outside of classical philosophy takes a practical approach and doesn't bother too much with the most abstract philosophical questions. It doesn't much care about if I'm a program in a simulation or a dream or a brain in a jar somewhere.
            Until such time as those things can be proven.

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        >basing your life on made up stories isn't good
        Prove it.

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          If you believe that you can fly and try to you will die

  15. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    That religion is a faith based belief system and atheism is typically evidence based? Yes anon we are aware.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Apparently not if you have all made over 50 posts in this thread so far completely ignoring it.

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        I'm maybe only made 1/5th the posts in this thread. Its the theists that are serial samegays (as evidence by there only being 20 posters here)

  16. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Tourist here, I feel like atheism won the debate this thread.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      What debate?
      >atheist: the burden of proof is on you
      >theist: I don't have any. That's kinda how this whole thing works, bud.
      >atheist: NANI?!

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah, I feel like admitting you have no proof makes you lose by default

  17. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why don't theists just offer a single piece of real evidence? just do it one time and every atheist who ever lived will be BTFO'd forever.

    Are you telling me that it's been thousands of years and you still don't have anything more than "dude, trust me"?

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah man it’s fake obviously.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      See

      You have a fundamental misunderstanding of religion if you are demanding proof.

  18. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    We know who made it up and why. Like your god. 😉

    >burden of proof to prove that god doesn’t exist

    [...] is the only logical answer if you really can’t think in abstract terms

    >god doesn’t exist
    Nothing to do with atheism. Take your meds.

    [...]

    Why are Christians this obsessed with trannies?

    You have a fundamental misunderstanding of religion if you are demanding proof.

    >You have a fundamental misunderstanding of religion if you are demanding proof. You must believe and invest all your life without any good reason.
    Then religion is not worth understanding. No proof = no reason to believe.

  19. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    prove God doesn't exist

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Nah, too lazy. Prove I'm not a woman.

  20. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >burden of proof
    >whataboutism
    >ad hominem
    Theist arguments in a nutshell

  21. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    >every theist on earth is making a claim merely by existing

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Correct.

  22. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Just imagine if Galileo had the same attitude as the gaytheists who try to associate themselves with him. Intellectually lazy and completely detached from the reality of the situation. Even the youngsters these days are smart enough to realize atheism is cringe.

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Even the youngsters these days are smart enough to realize atheism is cringe.
      The one "detached from the reality of the situation" here is you.

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        >lapse or irreligious = atheist
        Total gaytheist spin

  23. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Reminder that arguing in bad faith on the internet "just to see how far it can go" is an butthole move.

  24. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    >actually I don't have to provide evidence for my alternative explanation, the rules of internet debate say you have the burden of proof not me

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      So you concede you have no evidence for God?

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Evidence for what? Christians claim their god is real and they can’t prove it, so I don’t believe them.

  25. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why can't atheists prove the claims they make?

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      What claims? We just don't believe in the magic israelite for lack of any good reason to.

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        >umm akshally we don't have any beliefs, we don't have a worldview, I'm literally a tabula rasa
        How did anyone ever fall for this conjob?

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          >People who don't believe in talking snakes and floating zoos without a good reason make me seethe.
          Why's that?

  26. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    I just don't recognize the fallacies. Who made them? Why should I believe them? What makes them true?

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      >I just don't recognize the fallacies
      This probably means you are the one committing them
      >Who made them?
      Roman legal scholars formally came up with the concept of onus probandi, but the people who make logical fallacies are the people who commit them, which is why scholars canonize them to begin with. We recognize logical fallacies, because the purpose of debate isn't meant to be some competition of words, but a way to come to a mutual understanding about a topic, and fallacies prevent that from happening. Take burden of proof for example, when a Theist tells an atheist to prove God doesn't exist, thats not useful, because its generally recognized you can't disprove something you already think doesn't exist.

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        So, they're man-made nonsense then. Gotcha.

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          How so?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Men invented it, and I've yet to see evidence of their truthfulness. It just seems like a treaty, for efficient debate everyone involved must subscribe to the belief in these fallacies. When someone just doesn't believe in them or asks them to prove the existence of these fallacies, they get slaughtered.

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          People are fallacious, this is correct, take you for an example. This is why fallacies need to be called

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Called what, exactly? Prove this fallacy exists and what it's universally true. Show me this aspect you pin on me.

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        >because its generally recognized you can't disprove something you already think doesn't exist
        Really? You can't disprove God?
        It's weird that you guys make so many arguments trying to disprove God, then (eg problem of evil).

      • 5 months ago
        Anonymous

        Prove the existence of the fallacies and why they're universally true.

        If one man says God exists, and refuses to elaborate with evidence (see op pic), and another picture cites the fallacies, neither won. Neither provided evidence for their respective claims. It's then up to the observer to chose which one they believe, and it seems that the religious usually win.

        • 5 months ago
          Anonymous

          They are true, because the person who commits fallacies is the person who creates them. Its not really that hard to understand. If you don't think fallacies are real, then by that logic, debate itself isn't real, and you shouldn't be here, in fact you should just be taking your meds.
          > and another picture cites the fallacies, neither won. Neither provided evidence for their respective claims.
          Fallacies and calling out fallacies are not in and of themselves evidence, the point of pointing them out is to allow people to actually formulate a valid arguemnt, which theists cannot do, they cannot prove God doesn't exist, so they shift the burden of proof to atheists for them to disprove God exists, but atheists cannot do this, because they already don't believe in God, its up to theists to convince them otherwise.
          >It's then up to the observer to chose which one they believe, and it seems that the religious usually win.
          Ultimately yes, but it should be recognized that the evidence for God in a religious sense just doesn't exist. At best God is an indifferent, intangible observer.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Not him but what is a fallacy? Define it for me as a 'thing'.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Burden of proof is a fallacy, because it tries to shift the burden of proving something onto a party that already doesn't believe it exists. This is illogical.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            This is not an answer to my question. What is a fallacy? Burden of proof can be a fallacy all day long, that doesn't mean anything unless we know what a fallacy is.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            a failure in reasoning which renders an argument invalid.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            What is the basis of distinction between valid and invalid reasoning? Is the distinction objective or subjective? And is there a burden to reason validly?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            An invalid argument is one whose conclusion is not proven by its premises.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            "God isn't real."
            >not proven by its premises

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            What makes it invalid, other than the opinion of the believers in fallacies? Can you prove its invalid without your holy scripture (the fallacy jpgs)?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            We don't need to believe in fallacies, because fallacies are created by the person who commits them. There isn't some shadowy cabal of people that just asserts definitions onto things for no reason. And those jpegs didn't create those fallacies either. Your entire premise is flawed.

            "God isn't real."
            >not proven by its premises

            The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. This is a perfectly reasonable response to this post. If you don't think it is, it just means you cannot prove God exists. Any perfectly reasonable person would actually try and argue in their favor.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            If nobody invented the fallacies, show me one. Prove to me it's not just a sentence on a parchment/paper/jpg that someone made up.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            When a theist tells an atheist to prove God doesn't exist. This is fallacious, because the atheist already doesn't believe in God, so they cannot form a meaningful answer, the burden of proof is on the one making the claim that God exists, because the crux of this argument is to convince a nonbeliever into joining their cult.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            The atheist holds a position as well (God doesn't exist) which they which are defending by resisting.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Also, show me a fallacy. Show me that you didn't make them up just now.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            You're a loser. Prove me wrong.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Ad hominem :3

            Your subscription to fallacy-ism makes you weak.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            But anon, fallacies aren't real, so I guess you're just a loser and cannot prove me wrong.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Ad hominem :3

            If you concede that fallacies aren't real, I win and changed your world view so I'll just allow you to insult me. I still won't care, but I'll allow it.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            So you're saying fallacies are real?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            I'll just assume you're 85 years old or a newbie and don't know what ":3" means, or else that response is actually nonsense.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Anon, I've been here far too fricking long and never once have I seen someone using some emoticon cute face to express sarcasm

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            2006-gay here.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            2009

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Why is it illogical? Putting burdens onto other people a perfectly logical sentence structure.

            "Pick up that can." "No, you do it." And it's perfectly possible for them to do it instead.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            We're not talking about sentence structures. If I were to say in response "But the can is closer to you" that would also be valid even if that weren't true.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Okay, so why is it invalid then? That's what I was asking you. Stop avoiding.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            How is it logical to tell someone to prove something they already doesn't believe exists? You already know the answer to their argument

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            They possess a position too (God doesn't exist). They should have some reason they think that, or else me saying "God exists" would instantaneously convert them because they'd have no reason to resist.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Atheists don't believe God exists because they follow an evidence based philosiphy, and don't believe faith is a useful tool for understanding the natural world.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            That's a position they can be requested/demanded/commanded to defend, thus disproving the concept of burden of proof fallacy.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            But the premise of the argument in this case is that one party claims something exists, while the other side doesn't. You have to prove something exists first, otherwise you have no grounds to stand on.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Why? The other is making a claim as well. If they can't prove it they have no grounds to stand on and I win by default.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            I think this confusion comes from semantics. Generally speaking, you either believe in something or you don't. "I believe something doesn't exist" is not a valid argument either, but atheists simply lack belief in something, so the burden of proof isn't on them. I think most atheists would be more than willing to join a religion if they were convinced a particular God was real.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            >"I believe something doesn't exist" is not a valid argument either, but atheists simply lack belief in something, so the burden of proof isn't on them.
            That's my point. They have no argument and their only defence is this supposed "burden of proof," which I'm saying is mythological. Prove it exists. Prove its true.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            But thats not what atheists are saying. Atheists simply don't believe in God.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            ...because of burden of proof.
            That's the issue here.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            Atheists aren't the ones claiming God is real though. If I told you there was a teapot floating in space, and you didn't believe me, and I told you to prove to me otherwise, what would you say?

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            I would agree because I don't have the power to disprove it and it doesn't collide with my worldview.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            > I don't have the power to disprove it
            Sure you do, you can ask me how it got up there, I could explain the rocket that launched it into space, its approximate location in space.etc and if I don't have meaningful answers to this then you can call me out on my bullshit

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            1. It doesn't clash with my worldview, so I have no reason to resist. Sure, I could rigorously fact check the weather report every morning, but as it doesn't clash with my views I have no reason to bother.
            2. As i didn't personally see this rocket, there's nothing you could do to prove this besides heresay unless you were either personally there to see it (first hand account) or you could physically show me the teapot somehow. Anything else is hearsay in the same sense as me citing the bible. Either way, no reason to demand because you can't provide proof. If neither can prove anything (the current position on the theism debate) well just look at eachother like we've been doing.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            That's ultimately my case with all of this argument. Neither of us and nobody, either atheist or theist, can really prove anything. Faith is all that exists.

          • 5 months ago
            Anonymous

            > The burden of proof doesn't exist

  27. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    The proof for God is the impossibility of the contrary.
    atheism collapses into a self contradictory worldview, what remains is theism

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      Specifically Christian theism.

  28. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Gnosis, it was revealed to me through direct spiritual experience.

  29. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    Christ placed faith as his highest priority on purpose. Never once did he appeal to proof or go down a bullet point list of things people should know. He came to be rejected and even killed. And his message meant to be seen as foolishness by the world.
    >The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.-1 Cor 1:18

    • 5 months ago
      Anonymous

      I never thought of that verse that way. Is the intentional accepting of seemingly foolish beliefs an extension of the rejection of vanity?

  30. 5 months ago
    Anonymous

    God is proven by the impossibility of the contrary

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *