Is Belief in God Delusional or Non-Belief?

[Kenny]

The reason I am a skeptic is because I accept evidence instead of faith, trust, or simply taking someone else's word for it.

Again; what are these “atheistic opinions” you keep speaking of? I’ve got a feeling the problem is you are having trouble understanding what an atheist, or even a skeptic actually is! This is something we need to clarify before we can go any further because otherwise we will just be talking past each other. Again; what are some of these atheistic opinions that you are convinced atheists hold?

Ken

Kenny there is no way you can say you go by evidence instead of faith after having admitted you have chosen atheism knowing there is no evidence or reasons to choose to accept atheism while ignoring the massive amount of evidence behind Christianity,but in this case even false religions bring more evidence to the table than you have or can. You see before I ever had these kinds of discussions with atheists I used to have these kind of discussions with people in other religions and had to confront their evidence,but with atheists/agnostics they have no evidence to confront,just arguments against God is all they've got,but this is not evidence to know atheism is a choice a person should make because of no evidence behind their opinion of atheism.I'm not trying to insult your intelligence or anything like that. I'm trying to get you to realize the games atheists play on people like you and after I have done it,you can accept it or reject it,but you will not be able to be intellectually honest with yourself after I am done and this is why you are getting uncomfortable about this discussion but whether you accept it or not you cannot refute it and you'll have to live knowing this.

Again; what are these “atheistic opinions” you keep speaking of? I’ve got a feeling the problem is you are having trouble understanding what an atheist, or even a skeptic actually is! This is something we need to clarify before we can go any further because otherwise we will just be talking past each other. Again; what are some of these atheistic opinions that you are convinced atheists hold?

It does not matter what an atheist or a skeptic really is. You are focusing on the wrong thing. You should be focusing on how atheists convince people to be an atheist,Skeptic,etc based on the idea that they are excluded from having to have any evidence based on the default position,so they exclude themselves from needing to have any evidence behind their atheistic opinions that leads them to reject god's. They have absolutely no evidence yet judge others evidence based on their atheistic opinion that has no evidence behind it.There is no reason based on evidence to choose to be an atheist compared to the evidence in Christianity,other false religions,science,etc. Atheists have nothing to bring to the table except their judgmental atheistic opinion.Nobody should choose atheism based on this.

Are you going to answer my question? Or are you going to continue to repeat the same misinformation over and over again?

Ken

Atheists have accepted an opinion that causes them to reject god's.

What do you mean when you say “reject god’s”? Reject their existence? Reject they are who worshippers claim they are? Or something else.

I call it an opinion based on knowing they have no evidence behind it.

Do you believe someone should have evidence against a claim in order to reject it? Ex If I told you I were a billionaire, and you had no way of proving I am not, should you be obligated to take my word for it without me providing evidence that supports my claim to your satisfaction?

How do you know you are not wrong to have accepted your atheist opinion and do you care if you have truth on your side without any evidence?

Atheist opinion? Again; what opinion do you think Atheists have? And what truths do you think Atheists claim to have on their sides?

But if I have misunderstood something then please explain how.

I don’t think it is a matter of misunderstanding something; I think it is a matter of having misinformation.

Ken

I already explained that nobody not even atheists gets a pass when it comes to evidence behind what you have accepted. Yet here you are excluding yourself,proving me right that there is no way to know atheism is the correct choice a person should make.Don't get confused by words. Atheists choose to reject god's and overlook or explain away evidence for God,while having no evidence themselves and only their opinion at best.Take some time to think about this.

Also Christians being fed to lions because they refused to reject Jesus and the fact he rose from the dead is even more evidence Christianity is true. People do not die for what they know are lies. I bet if you know you saw Jesus be crucified,seen him die and then seen him after he rose from the dead like he said he would before it happened and he told you to go preach the gospel and filled you with the Holy Spirit,no matter how afraid you may have been when they were crucifying him you would be willing to die even if nobody believed you. No government,ruler,etc could stop you from preaching Jesus rose from the dead,no matter if they threw you in jail and warned you and demanded that you stop doing it. You would tell them to go fly a kite!

You asked me questions and I answered them and responded with questions of my own. Instead of responding to my questions as I did for yours, you ignore my questions and repeat the same false information over and over again. If you were interested in having an actual conversation, you would offer me the same courtesy I offered you by responding to my actual post, as I did yours. It’s obvious all you want to do is preach, but you refuse to listen.
I believe it was Charles Goethe who said it best when he said

“what the world needs right now is less Preachers, and more Teachers.

Wise words indeed. Perhaps you should go find a choir to preach to; I think we're done here. Good luck my friend!

Ken

[abelcainsbrother]

Kenny there is no way you can say you go by evidence instead of faith after having admitted you have chosen atheism knowing there is no evidence or reasons to choose to accept atheism while ignoring the massive amount of evidence behind Christianity,but in this case even false religions bring more evidence to the table than you have or can. You see before I ever had these kinds of discussions with atheists I used to have these kind of discussions with people in other religions and had to confront their evidence,but with atheists/agnostics they have no evidence to confront,just arguments against God is all they've got,but this is not evidence to know atheism is a choice a person should make because of no evidence behind their opinion of atheism.I'm not trying to insult your intelligence or anything like that. I'm trying to get you to realize the games atheists play on people like you and after I have done it,you can accept it or reject it,but you will not be able to be intellectually honest with yourself after I am done and this is why you are getting uncomfortable about this discussion but whether you accept it or not you cannot refute it and you'll have to live knowing this.



It does not matter what an atheist or a skeptic really is. You are focusing on the wrong thing. You should be focusing on how atheists convince people to be an atheist,Skeptic,etc based on the idea that they are excluded from having to have any evidence based on the default position,so they exclude themselves from needing to have any evidence behind their atheistic opinions that leads them to reject god's. They have absolutely no evidence yet judge others evidence based on their atheistic opinion that has no evidence behind it.There is no reason based on evidence to choose to be an atheist compared to the evidence in Christianity,other false religions,science,etc. Atheists have nothing to bring to the table except their judgmental atheistic opinion.Nobody should choose atheism based on this.

Are you going to answer my question? Or are you going to continue to repeat the same misinformation over and over again?

Ken

Atheists have accepted an opinion that causes them to reject god's.

What do you mean when you say “reject god’s”? Reject their existence? Reject they are who worshippers claim they are? Or something else.

I call it an opinion based on knowing they have no evidence behind it.

Do you believe someone should have evidence against a claim in order to reject it? Ex If I told you I were a billionaire, and you had no way of proving I am not, should you be obligated to take my word for it without me providing evidence that supports my claim to your satisfaction?

How do you know you are not wrong to have accepted your atheist opinion and do you care if you have truth on your side without any evidence?

Atheist opinion? Again; what opinion do you think Atheists have? And what truths do you think Atheists claim to have on their sides?

But if I have misunderstood something then please explain how.

I don’t think it is a matter of misunderstanding something; I think it is a matter of having misinformation.

Ken

I already explained that nobody not even atheists gets a pass when it comes to evidence behind what you have accepted. Yet here you are excluding yourself,proving me right that there is no way to know atheism is the correct choice a person should make.Don't get confused by words. Atheists choose to reject god's and overlook or explain away evidence for God,while having no evidence themselves and only their opinion at best.Take some time to think about this.

Also Christians being fed to lions because they refused to reject Jesus and the fact he rose from the dead is even more evidence Christianity is true. People do not die for what they know are lies. I bet if you know you saw Jesus be crucified,seen him die and then seen him after he rose from the dead like he said he would before it happened and he told you to go preach the gospel and filled you with the Holy Spirit,no matter how afraid you may have been when they were crucifying him you would be willing to die even if nobody believed you. No government,ruler,etc could stop you from preaching Jesus rose from the dead,no matter if they threw you in jail and warned you and demanded that you stop doing it. You would tell them to go fly a kite!

You asked me questions and I answered them and responded with questions of my own. Instead of responding to my questions as I did for yours, you ignore my questions and repeat the same false information over and over again. If you were interested in having an actual conversation, you would offer me the same courtesy I offered you by responding to my actual post, as I did yours. It’s obvious all you want to do is preach, but you refuse to listen.
I believe it was Charles Goethe who said it best when he said

“what the world needs right now is less Preachers, and more Teachers.

Wise words indeed. Perhaps you should go find a choir to preach to; I think we're done here. Good luck my friend!

Ken

I answered plenty of your questions but you just keep focusing on the wrong things with your questions.Some of your questions let me know that you are OK with atheists being excluded from needing evidence and so do not have any and you are OK with it.I am not and I don't think rational,logical thinking people would be also. Like I said you have to live knowing you have absolutely no way to know you made the right choice to be atheist and reject god,s,but it is not just God but it is truth itself in the case of atheism. And no I am not giving false information about how atheist/agnostics exclude themselves from needing evidence and do not believe they need to have any to know they are right. I could give evidence to prove they do,just as you already did. You yourself are excluding yourself and have no evidence and you are OK with it. You have no way to know that when you die you were right and there is no hell and you won't go there and are willing to take that shot in the dark.

[Kenny]

Are you going to answer my question? Or are you going to continue to repeat the same misinformation over and over again?

Ken

Atheists have accepted an opinion that causes them to reject god's.

What do you mean when you say “reject god’s”? Reject their existence? Reject they are who worshippers claim they are? Or something else.

I call it an opinion based on knowing they have no evidence behind it.

Do you believe someone should have evidence against a claim in order to reject it? Ex If I told you I were a billionaire, and you had no way of proving I am not, should you be obligated to take my word for it without me providing evidence that supports my claim to your satisfaction?

How do you know you are not wrong to have accepted your atheist opinion and do you care if you have truth on your side without any evidence?

Atheist opinion? Again; what opinion do you think Atheists have? And what truths do you think Atheists claim to have on their sides?

But if I have misunderstood something then please explain how.

I don’t think it is a matter of misunderstanding something; I think it is a matter of having misinformation.

Ken

I already explained that nobody not even atheists gets a pass when it comes to evidence behind what you have accepted. Yet here you are excluding yourself,proving me right that there is no way to know atheism is the correct choice a person should make.Don't get confused by words. Atheists choose to reject god's and overlook or explain away evidence for God,while having no evidence themselves and only their opinion at best.Take some time to think about this.

Also Christians being fed to lions because they refused to reject Jesus and the fact he rose from the dead is even more evidence Christianity is true. People do not die for what they know are lies. I bet if you know you saw Jesus be crucified,seen him die and then seen him after he rose from the dead like he said he would before it happened and he told you to go preach the gospel and filled you with the Holy Spirit,no matter how afraid you may have been when they were crucifying him you would be willing to die even if nobody believed you. No government,ruler,etc could stop you from preaching Jesus rose from the dead,no matter if they threw you in jail and warned you and demanded that you stop doing it. You would tell them to go fly a kite!

You asked me questions and I answered them and responded with questions of my own. Instead of responding to my questions as I did for yours, you ignore my questions and repeat the same false information over and over again. If you were interested in having an actual conversation, you would offer me the same courtesy I offered you by responding to my actual post, as I did yours. It’s obvious all you want to do is preach, but you refuse to listen.
I believe it was Charles Goethe who said it best when he said

“what the world needs right now is less Preachers, and more Teachers.

Wise words indeed. Perhaps you should go find a choir to preach to; I think we're done here. Good luck my friend!

Ken

I answered plenty of your questions but you just keep focusing on the wrong things with your questions.

Below are a list of questions you have refused to answer.

*What do you mean when you say “reject god’s”? Reject their existence? Reject they are who worshippers claim they are? Or something else.

*Do you believe someone should have evidence against a claim in order to reject it? Ex If I told you I were a billionaire, and you had no way of proving I am not, should you be obligated to take my word for it without me providing evidence that supports my claim to your satisfaction?

*Atheist opinion? Again; what opinion do you think Atheists have? And what truths do you think Atheists claim to have on their sides?

Are you going to answer them or are you going to continue to preach?

Ken

[abelcainsbrother]

What do you mean when you say “reject god’s”? Reject their existence? Reject they are who worshippers claim they are? Or something else.

Do you believe someone should have evidence against a claim in order to reject it? Ex If I told you I were a billionaire, and you had no way of proving I am not, should you be obligated to take my word for it without me providing evidence that supports my claim to your satisfaction?

Atheist opinion? Again; what opinion do you think Atheists have? And what truths do you think Atheists claim to have on their sides?

I don’t think it is a matter of misunderstanding something; I think it is a matter of having misinformation.

Ken

I already explained that nobody not even atheists gets a pass when it comes to evidence behind what you have accepted. Yet here you are excluding yourself,proving me right that there is no way to know atheism is the correct choice a person should make.Don't get confused by words. Atheists choose to reject god's and overlook or explain away evidence for God,while having no evidence themselves and only their opinion at best.Take some time to think about this.

Also Christians being fed to lions because they refused to reject Jesus and the fact he rose from the dead is even more evidence Christianity is true. People do not die for what they know are lies. I bet if you know you saw Jesus be crucified,seen him die and then seen him after he rose from the dead like he said he would before it happened and he told you to go preach the gospel and filled you with the Holy Spirit,no matter how afraid you may have been when they were crucifying him you would be willing to die even if nobody believed you. No government,ruler,etc could stop you from preaching Jesus rose from the dead,no matter if they threw you in jail and warned you and demanded that you stop doing it. You would tell them to go fly a kite!

You asked me questions and I answered them and responded with questions of my own. Instead of responding to my questions as I did for yours, you ignore my questions and repeat the same false information over and over again. If you were interested in having an actual conversation, you would offer me the same courtesy I offered you by responding to my actual post, as I did yours. It’s obvious all you want to do is preach, but you refuse to listen.
I believe it was Charles Goethe who said it best when he said

“what the world needs right now is less Preachers, and more Teachers.

Wise words indeed. Perhaps you should go find a choir to preach to; I think we're done here. Good luck my friend!

Ken

I answered plenty of your questions but you just keep focusing on the wrong things with your questions.

Below are a list of questions you have refused to answer.

*What do you mean when you say “reject god’s”? Reject their existence? Reject they are who worshippers claim they are? Or something else.

*Do you believe someone should have evidence against a claim in order to reject it? Ex If I told you I were a billionaire, and you had no way of proving I am not, should you be obligated to take my word for it without me providing evidence that supports my claim to your satisfaction?

*Atheist opinion? Again; what opinion do you think Atheists have? And what truths do you think Atheists claim to have on their sides?

Are you going to answer them or are you going to continue to preach?

Ken

Atheists reject all god's.

Yes I believe somebody should have evidence behind what they have chosen to accept and is a reason to reject God/god's.

Yes atheist opinion because you have no way to know you have made the correct choice,choosing to be atheist.The moment you accepted atheism you were supposed to do it based on evidence,but you didn't.

I don't think atheists have "truths" on their side for why they choose to reject God because they have no evidence behind the atheist opinion they accepted for whatever reason.

Shot in the dark. For you
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mzyz2egx_0c

[Kenny]

I already explained that nobody not even atheists gets a pass when it comes to evidence behind what you have accepted. Yet here you are excluding yourself,proving me right that there is no way to know atheism is the correct choice a person should make.Don't get confused by words. Atheists choose to reject god's and overlook or explain away evidence for God,while having no evidence themselves and only their opinion at best.Take some time to think about this.

Also Christians being fed to lions because they refused to reject Jesus and the fact he rose from the dead is even more evidence Christianity is true. People do not die for what they know are lies. I bet if you know you saw Jesus be crucified,seen him die and then seen him after he rose from the dead like he said he would before it happened and he told you to go preach the gospel and filled you with the Holy Spirit,no matter how afraid you may have been when they were crucifying him you would be willing to die even if nobody believed you. No government,ruler,etc could stop you from preaching Jesus rose from the dead,no matter if they threw you in jail and warned you and demanded that you stop doing it. You would tell them to go fly a kite!

You asked me questions and I answered them and responded with questions of my own. Instead of responding to my questions as I did for yours, you ignore my questions and repeat the same false information over and over again. If you were interested in having an actual conversation, you would offer me the same courtesy I offered you by responding to my actual post, as I did yours. It’s obvious all you want to do is preach, but you refuse to listen.
I believe it was Charles Goethe who said it best when he said

“what the world needs right now is less Preachers, and more Teachers.

Wise words indeed. Perhaps you should go find a choir to preach to; I think we're done here. Good luck my friend!

Ken

I answered plenty of your questions but you just keep focusing on the wrong things with your questions.

Below are a list of questions you have refused to answer.

*What do you mean when you say “reject god’s”? Reject their existence? Reject they are who worshippers claim they are? Or something else.

*Do you believe someone should have evidence against a claim in order to reject it? Ex If I told you I were a billionaire, and you had no way of proving I am not, should you be obligated to take my word for it without me providing evidence that supports my claim to your satisfaction?

*Atheist opinion? Again; what opinion do you think Atheists have? And what truths do you think Atheists claim to have on their sides?

Are you going to answer them or are you going to continue to preach?

Ken

Atheists reject all god's.

I didn’t ask if Atheists reject all Gods, I asked what do you mean when you say they reject God; do you believe Atheists believe God doesn’t exist? Do you believe Atheists just reject what worshippers say about God? Or something different

Yes I believe somebody should have evidence behind what they have chosen to accept and is a reason to reject God/god's.

Again that’s not what I asked you; I asked is evidence necessary to REJECT a claim. Using my scenario, if I told you I were a billionaire, are you obligated to take me at my word if you cannot prove I am not? Or is all the proof required from me?

Yes atheist opinion because you have no way to know you have made the correct choice,choosing to be atheist.The moment you accepted atheism you were supposed to do it based on evidence,but you didn't.

I don't think atheists have "truths" on their side for why they choose to reject God because they have no evidence behind the atheist opinion they accepted for whatever reason.

The last 2 you didn’t even attempt to address my question; you just went on another one of your preaching rants. Here is my last question in case you forgot;

What opinions do you believe Atheists have and what truth do they claim to have on their side?

I appreciate you attempting to answer some of my questions; unfortunately you answered questions I didn't even ask, and you neglected to address the questions I DID ask. Care to try again?

Ken

[abelcainsbrother]

Kenny you are hung up on trying to exclude yourself from knowing you accepted the truth when you accepted atheism with questions like this.

*Do you believe someone should have evidence against a claim in order to reject it? Ex If I told you I were a billionaire, and you had no way of proving I am not, should you be obligated to take my word for it without me providing evidence that supports my claim to your satisfaction?

When I already explained that nobody gets a pass. Yes,I should have evidence before I reject that you are a billionaire,just like you should have looked for evidence to reject god's and decided to be atheistic in your thinking,yet you admitted you didn't and don't have any.So before you can rule out that somebody is not a billionaire YOU need to have evidence yourself you are right.

You see,until you get serious about knowing the choices you make are correct,you need to have evidence behind them,but you are excluding yourself from knowing truth,you have no way to determine when you are confronted with evidence making the choice you made.This is why you cannot tell that I have already given some evidence to back up my faith in Jesus,it is you that cannot do it when it comes to atheism because truth is not important to you because you chose atheism based on no evidence it is true and because you keep trying to put all the burden on me to prove my faith while excluding yourself from needing to have any,it proves that you are not at all concerned about if you are right or not,unlike me. You can't know truth excluding yourself from needing evidence.

[Kenny]

Kenny you are hung up on trying to exclude yourself from knowing you accepted the truth when you accepted atheism with questions like this.

*Do you believe someone should have evidence against a claim in order to reject it? Ex If I told you I were a billionaire, and you had no way of proving I am not, should you be obligated to take my word for it without me providing evidence that supports my claim to your satisfaction?

Yes,I should have evidence before I reject that you are a billionaire,

How about if I told you I could run 100 mph, fly like a bird, or lift a ton? Would you still be obligated to believe me even to the point of risking your well-being if I fail to do as I claimed?
If you honestly believe what you just claimed to believe, you know little about debating. When you have one person making a claim, and another person is not making a claim, the one making the claim has the burden of proof. If I claim to be a Billionaire, I am the one who is obligated to provide proof that I am if I am going to expect you to believe it, you are not required to dismantle every ridicules claim I am capable of making unless I am trying to convince you that your claims are false.

You see,until you get serious about knowing the choices you make are correct,you need to have evidence behind them,

A week ago I gave several examples of why I don’t believe in your God. I was very clear my reasons may not be evidence to your satisfaction but it is to mine.
In other words, because I am not making a claim against the existence of your God, I have no burden of proof.
But because you ARE making a claim about God, you are the one who has the burden of proof if you expect me to believe you.

Now; would you mind answering the rest of my questions?


Ken

[abelcainsbrother]

Kenny you are hung up on trying to exclude yourself from knowing you accepted the truth when you accepted atheism with questions like this.

*Do you believe someone should have evidence against a claim in order to reject it? Ex If I told you I were a billionaire, and you had no way of proving I am not, should you be obligated to take my word for it without me providing evidence that supports my claim to your satisfaction?

Yes,I should have evidence before I reject that you are a billionaire,

How about if I told you I could run 100 mph, fly like a bird, or lift a ton? Would you still be obligated to believe me even to the point of risking your well-being if I fail to do as I claimed?
If you honestly believe what you just claimed to believe, you know little about debating. When you have one person making a claim, and another person is not making a claim, the one making the claim has the burden of proof. If I claim to be a Billionaire, I am the one who is obligated to provide proof that I am if I am going to expect you to believe it, you are not required to dismantle every ridicules claim I am capable of making unless I am trying to convince you that your claims are false.

You see,until you get serious about knowing the choices you make are correct,you need to have evidence behind them,

A week ago I gave several examples of why I don’t believe in your God. I was very clear my reasons may not be evidence to your satisfaction but it is to mine.
In other words, because I am not making a claim against the existence of your God, I have no burden of proof.
But because you ARE making a claim about God, you are the one who has the burden of proof if you expect me to believe you.

Now; would you mind answering the rest of my questions?


Ken

In all of them examples you gave you would need evidence before you rejected it. You are under some delusion that you can choose to be atheistic in your thinking while having absolutely no evidence. I mean go ahead and believe that if you choose to but do not expect to ever know truth. Do not claim you are a person who goes by evidence to determine truth or not,because you don't,which is why you choose to be atheist knowing you have no evidence.

You giving several reasons why you reject my God is not evidence you are correct.You may have poor understanding about my God and not realize it or you may have false information about my God and because evidence is not important to you can't know whether or not it is correct information or not.

Yet you'll never know you are right for choosing to be atheist being and atheist because you think the burden of proof is on others and does not apply to you while knowing you have no evidence behind your atheistic thinking. You are a person who goes on how you feel instead of evidence for what is true or false. Therefore there is no reason why I should give you evidence that I believe in the true God because you go on how you feel and do not need evidence to accept things as true or not. I would have just as much of a chance of convincing you I believe in the true God by just telling you I do.

[abelcainsbrother]

Like I told you before Kenny somewhere in this thread this argument cannot be refuted by atheists/agnostics/skeptics you can only ignore it,and it seems you are. But I'm a person who likes to research things and get to the truth or not of whether or not something is true or not. I don't get to do it as much as I used to,but I know how.But I know and you know that based on the fact that atheism has no evidence behind it and you think you are excluded from needing to have any evidence because you think only the person making a claim has to have evidence we know atheism is not true going by evidence.

And as a Christian it is a lie from Satan who is the father of lies and this is why there is absolutely no evidence that atheistic thinking is correct because lies do not really have evidence behind them.

[Kenny]

Kenny you are hung up on trying to exclude yourself from knowing you accepted the truth when you accepted atheism with questions like this.

*Do you believe someone should have evidence against a claim in order to reject it? Ex If I told you I were a billionaire, and you had no way of proving I am not, should you be obligated to take my word for it without me providing evidence that supports my claim to your satisfaction?

Yes,I should have evidence before I reject that you are a billionaire,

How about if I told you I could run 100 mph, fly like a bird, or lift a ton? Would you still be obligated to believe me even to the point of risking your well-being if I fail to do as I claimed?
If you honestly believe what you just claimed to believe, you know little about debating. When you have one person making a claim, and another person is not making a claim, the one making the claim has the burden of proof. If I claim to be a Billionaire, I am the one who is obligated to provide proof that I am if I am going to expect you to believe it, you are not required to dismantle every ridicules claim I am capable of making unless I am trying to convince you that your claims are false.

You see,until you get serious about knowing the choices you make are correct,you need to have evidence behind them,

A week ago I gave several examples of why I don’t believe in your God. I was very clear my reasons may not be evidence to your satisfaction but it is to mine.
In other words, because I am not making a claim against the existence of your God, I have no burden of proof.
But because you ARE making a claim about God, you are the one who has the burden of proof if you expect me to believe you.

Now; would you mind answering the rest of my questions?


Ken

In all of them examples you gave you would need evidence before you rejected it.

Give some examples of the type of evidence I need against those specific claims I mentioned, in order to reject them.

Ken

[abelcainsbrother]

Kenny you are hung up on trying to exclude yourself from knowing you accepted the truth when you accepted atheism with questions like this.

*Do you believe someone should have evidence against a claim in order to reject it? Ex If I told you I were a billionaire, and you had no way of proving I am not, should you be obligated to take my word for it without me providing evidence that supports my claim to your satisfaction?

Yes,I should have evidence before I reject that you are a billionaire,

How about if I told you I could run 100 mph, fly like a bird, or lift a ton? Would you still be obligated to believe me even to the point of risking your well-being if I fail to do as I claimed?
If you honestly believe what you just claimed to believe, you know little about debating. When you have one person making a claim, and another person is not making a claim, the one making the claim has the burden of proof. If I claim to be a Billionaire, I am the one who is obligated to provide proof that I am if I am going to expect you to believe it, you are not required to dismantle every ridicules claim I am capable of making unless I am trying to convince you that your claims are false.

You see,until you get serious about knowing the choices you make are correct,you need to have evidence behind them,

A week ago I gave several examples of why I don’t believe in your God. I was very clear my reasons may not be evidence to your satisfaction but it is to mine.
In other words, because I am not making a claim against the existence of your God, I have no burden of proof.
But because you ARE making a claim about God, you are the one who has the burden of proof if you expect me to believe you.

Now; would you mind answering the rest of my questions?


Ken

In all of them examples you gave you would need evidence before you rejected it.

Give some examples of the type of evidence I need against those specific claims I mentioned, in order to reject them.

Ken

Ken somebody fed you a line of bull and you bought it hook,line and sinker. If you told me you were a billionaire I would need evidence before I rejected it. If you told me you could run 100 mph I would need evidence before I rejected it. If you told me you could lift a ton I would need evidence it is not true. If you told me you do not believe in any God I would need evidence why you don't. If you rejected all god's and kept it to yourself you would need evidence why you reject god's. If God's word said that God created the entire universe and later was born into this world fulfilling prophecies that said he would and while on earth he turned water into wine,healed the sick,raised the dead,walked on water,calmed a raging storm,rose from the dead,etc it would not require much faith to believe it especially when we have an image he left for us on his burial garments,which is evidence he was here and can do miracles,rose from the dead based on the fact the shroud image cannot be duplicated by man despite all of the technology man has and man has tried to duplicate it and show man can produce one and failed.

[Kenny]

Kenny you are hung up on trying to exclude yourself from knowing you accepted the truth when you accepted atheism with questions like this.

*Do you believe someone should have evidence against a claim in order to reject it? Ex If I told you I were a billionaire, and you had no way of proving I am not, should you be obligated to take my word for it without me providing evidence that supports my claim to your satisfaction?

Yes,I should have evidence before I reject that you are a billionaire,

How about if I told you I could run 100 mph, fly like a bird, or lift a ton? Would you still be obligated to believe me even to the point of risking your well-being if I fail to do as I claimed?
If you honestly believe what you just claimed to believe, you know little about debating. When you have one person making a claim, and another person is not making a claim, the one making the claim has the burden of proof. If I claim to be a Billionaire, I am the one who is obligated to provide proof that I am if I am going to expect you to believe it, you are not required to dismantle every ridicules claim I am capable of making unless I am trying to convince you that your claims are false.

You see,until you get serious about knowing the choices you make are correct,you need to have evidence behind them,

A week ago I gave several examples of why I don’t believe in your God. I was very clear my reasons may not be evidence to your satisfaction but it is to mine.
In other words, because I am not making a claim against the existence of your God, I have no burden of proof.
But because you ARE making a claim about God, you are the one who has the burden of proof if you expect me to believe you.

Now; would you mind answering the rest of my questions?


Ken

In all of them examples you gave you would need evidence before you rejected it.

Give some examples of the type of evidence I need against those specific claims I mentioned, in order to reject them.

Ken

Ken somebody fed you a line of bull and you bought it hook,line and sinker.

Really? Do tell!

If you told me you were a billionaire I would need evidence before I rejected it. If you told me you could run 100 mph I would need evidence before I rejected it. If you told me you could lift a ton I would need evidence it is not true. If you told me you do not believe in any God I would need evidence why you don't.

Okay, that what sounds like a line of bull, and I am not buying it hook,line and sinker. It’s easy for you to say that because you have nothing invested to lose if I were lying to you.
If you were about to go into business with me and you weren’t sure I had enough capital to secure my share of the expense involved, I will bet dollars to doughnuts me simply telling you I am a billionaire would not be good enough, you would make sure I was and if I refused to provide evidence to you I had the capital needed, you wouldn’t take my word for it; because you would be a fool if you did.
If my inability to run 100 mph or lift a ton would cost you your life savings, admit it; you wouldn't take my word for that either.

C'mon Bruh admit it; you know I'm right!

[abelcainsbrother]

Kenny you are hung up on trying to exclude yourself from knowing you accepted the truth when you accepted atheism with questions like this.

*Do you believe someone should have evidence against a claim in order to reject it? Ex If I told you I were a billionaire, and you had no way of proving I am not, should you be obligated to take my word for it without me providing evidence that supports my claim to your satisfaction?

Yes,I should have evidence before I reject that you are a billionaire,

How about if I told you I could run 100 mph, fly like a bird, or lift a ton? Would you still be obligated to believe me even to the point of risking your well-being if I fail to do as I claimed?
If you honestly believe what you just claimed to believe, you know little about debating. When you have one person making a claim, and another person is not making a claim, the one making the claim has the burden of proof. If I claim to be a Billionaire, I am the one who is obligated to provide proof that I am if I am going to expect you to believe it, you are not required to dismantle every ridicules claim I am capable of making unless I am trying to convince you that your claims are false.

You see,until you get serious about knowing the choices you make are correct,you need to have evidence behind them,

A week ago I gave several examples of why I don’t believe in your God. I was very clear my reasons may not be evidence to your satisfaction but it is to mine.
In other words, because I am not making a claim against the existence of your God, I have no burden of proof.
But because you ARE making a claim about God, you are the one who has the burden of proof if you expect me to believe you.

Now; would you mind answering the rest of my questions?


Ken

In all of them examples you gave you would need evidence before you rejected it.

Give some examples of the type of evidence I need against those specific claims I mentioned, in order to reject them.

Ken

Ken somebody fed you a line of bull and you bought it hook,line and sinker.

Really? Do tell!

If you told me you were a billionaire I would need evidence before I rejected it. If you told me you could run 100 mph I would need evidence before I rejected it. If you told me you could lift a ton I would need evidence it is not true. If you told me you do not believe in any God I would need evidence why you don't.

Okay, that what sounds like a line of bull, and I am not buying it hook,line and sinker. It’s easy for you to say that because you have nothing invested to lose if I were lying to you.
If you were about to go into business with me and you weren’t sure I had enough capital to secure my share of the expense involved, I will bet dollars to doughnuts me simply telling you I am a billionaire would not be good enough, you would make sure I was and if I refused to provide evidence to you I had the capital needed, you wouldn’t take my word for it; because you would be a fool if you did.
If my inability to run 100 mph or lift a ton would cost you your life savings, admit it; you wouldn't take my word for that either.

C'mon Bruh admit it; you know I'm right!

I would have evidence in any scenario to know whether or not you are being truthful.No I wouldn't just believe you and it includes why you reject god's.If you reject god's but have no evidence to choose to think that? I'm going to not believe you just like if you claim to be a billionaire,can run 100 mph,can lift a ton and have no evidence I'm not going to believe you.

[Kenny]

Kenny you are hung up on trying to exclude yourself from knowing you accepted the truth when you accepted atheism with questions like this.




How about if I told you I could run 100 mph, fly like a bird, or lift a ton? Would you still be obligated to believe me even to the point of risking your well-being if I fail to do as I claimed?
If you honestly believe what you just claimed to believe, you know little about debating. When you have one person making a claim, and another person is not making a claim, the one making the claim has the burden of proof. If I claim to be a Billionaire, I am the one who is obligated to provide proof that I am if I am going to expect you to believe it, you are not required to dismantle every ridicules claim I am capable of making unless I am trying to convince you that your claims are false.


A week ago I gave several examples of why I don’t believe in your God. I was very clear my reasons may not be evidence to your satisfaction but it is to mine.
In other words, because I am not making a claim against the existence of your God, I have no burden of proof.
But because you ARE making a claim about God, you are the one who has the burden of proof if you expect me to believe you.

Now; would you mind answering the rest of my questions?


Ken

In all of them examples you gave you would need evidence before you rejected it.

Give some examples of the type of evidence I need against those specific claims I mentioned, in order to reject them.

Ken

Ken somebody fed you a line of bull and you bought it hook,line and sinker.

Really? Do tell!

If you told me you were a billionaire I would need evidence before I rejected it. If you told me you could run 100 mph I would need evidence before I rejected it. If you told me you could lift a ton I would need evidence it is not true. If you told me you do not believe in any God I would need evidence why you don't.

Okay, that what sounds like a line of bull, and I am not buying it hook,line and sinker. It’s easy for you to say that because you have nothing invested to lose if I were lying to you.
If you were about to go into business with me and you weren’t sure I had enough capital to secure my share of the expense involved, I will bet dollars to doughnuts me simply telling you I am a billionaire would not be good enough, you would make sure I was and if I refused to provide evidence to you I had the capital needed, you wouldn’t take my word for it; because you would be a fool if you did.
If my inability to run 100 mph or lift a ton would cost you your life savings, admit it; you wouldn't take my word for that either.

C'mon Bruh admit it; you know I'm right!

I would have evidence in any scenario to know whether or not you are being truthful.No I wouldn't just believe you and it includes why you reject god's.If you reject god's but have no evidence to choose to think that? I'm going to not believe you just like if you claim to be a billionaire,can run 100 mph,can lift a ton and have no evidence I'm not going to believe you.

Okay; just to be clear, you admit if I claimed to be a billionaire, could run 100 mph, or could lift a ton, and I refused to provide evidence to your satisfaction that I could do these things, you would not take my word for it; is that correct?

Ken

[abelcainsbrother]

In all of them examples you gave you would need evidence before you rejected it.

Give some examples of the type of evidence I need against those specific claims I mentioned, in order to reject them.

Ken

Ken somebody fed you a line of bull and you bought it hook,line and sinker.

Really? Do tell!

If you told me you were a billionaire I would need evidence before I rejected it. If you told me you could run 100 mph I would need evidence before I rejected it. If you told me you could lift a ton I would need evidence it is not true. If you told me you do not believe in any God I would need evidence why you don't.

Okay, that what sounds like a line of bull, and I am not buying it hook,line and sinker. It’s easy for you to say that because you have nothing invested to lose if I were lying to you.
If you were about to go into business with me and you weren’t sure I had enough capital to secure my share of the expense involved, I will bet dollars to doughnuts me simply telling you I am a billionaire would not be good enough, you would make sure I was and if I refused to provide evidence to you I had the capital needed, you wouldn’t take my word for it; because you would be a fool if you did.
If my inability to run 100 mph or lift a ton would cost you your life savings, admit it; you wouldn't take my word for that either.

C'mon Bruh admit it; you know I'm right!

I would have evidence in any scenario to know whether or not you are being truthful.No I wouldn't just believe you and it includes why you reject god's.If you reject god's but have no evidence to choose to think that? I'm going to not believe you just like if you claim to be a billionaire,can run 100 mph,can lift a ton and have no evidence I'm not going to believe you.

Okay; just to be clear, you admit if I claimed to be a billionaire, could run 100 mph, or could lift a ton, and I refused to provide evidence to your satisfaction that I could do these things, you would not take my word for it; is that correct?

Ken

No I did not admit that,it is all based on evidence whether or not I believe you. Give it up Ken. I know that atheists/agnostics/skeptics have come up with a fancy way of explaining why they are excluded and do not have to have any evidence because they are not making a positive claim,but it is delusional thinking.Why do you as an atheist not care to know you are right or not in your atheistic thinking so much so that you come up with a way to explain why you are excluded and don't have to have any evidence?

How do you know the person who came up with this burden of proof rule was correct?I would be leary of a person who told me that and lives his life like that.How can you believe somebody who thinks that way? You'll never know they are telling you the truth.How do you know you were'nt propagandized?