Search results

I refer you to my post, about Agnostic Athiesm. And Do you or do you not believe in God? If so all our rebuttals are valid. If not, and you are simply arguing that scientific proof does not disprove God, than you are the one who does not understand my position.

So basically you are arguing for the existence of something with the same credibility of a Flying Spaghetti monster, a pink unicorn, fairies, a dragon in my garage.

Its a combination of the two, you cannot provide a decent argument/evidence. so you tell me "well nothing disproves God either" which i point you towards Russell's teapot. Yet you still maintain your claim that there is a God. And really do you really fucken expect "i experienced God" to be a...

No the Truth is Someone wrote this song. You jump to the conclusion that it is Your favorite composer, as opposed to all other possible Composers.

I once again point you towards Russel teapot. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russels_teapot

So you are claiming the literal interpretation is correct now? To humor you, this arguments just goes back to God's unfalsifiable nature of God, which by now you should know why this argument wont stand very well.

With extraordinary claims, there must be extraordinary evidence to back it up. If i told you, i had a bowl of cereal today by myself, there would be no proof but my word that i ate it, however, you would probably believe me (i hope). However, if i told you i ate Cereal this morning served in a...

I have already stated it is not literally right.

I'll ignore, for now, your idiotic refusal to acknowledge fact and evidence. This is basically, in a nutshell, a you can't disprove God argument. Lets also extend your analogy, lets say you and me try to identify the Composer. But we fail in finding anything tangible to lead us to a...

I did say, the literal interpretation could not be true.

Because then the Spaghetti monster does not have to be logical. Besides its more your arguments not being logical, rather than God. Evolution disproves literal interpretations of the bible. (6000 years is not a adequate time frame for evolution) + Are you suggesting i provide evidence for your...

That Cartoon still run on any channels?

He is questioning, the general logic and reasoning skills of such people, he is not making a suppressed assumption. But evolution does prove the bible wrong.(literal interpretations anyway) I'd also like you to provide some sort of evidence for a Guided evolution before implying that it is.

You might wanna re-read this. But, there are no arguments provided by the atheists, the atheists only provide rebuttals to your arguments.

Oh the stories i could tell you, I'm a tutor in my schools peer reading program. Some of these kids have problems reading 3 letter words.

No, that is just plain wrong. An Atheist simply denies the Theists claim. "If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot...

I never said that something disproved God, in fact, i said doing so would be a logical Fallacy.

You mean when i realized scripture was a load of shit? It is easy for me to claim that theists are brainwashed, leading basically to a "no u" argument. Which is pointless for both sides. and BTW brainwashed by who exactly? The satanic-atheist-Scientist agenda?

What a BS conclusion!

My apologies, I mean there is no evidence provided by anyone, of a guided evolution. I really doubt any atheists in this thread have said that evolution disproves God, in most cases it's theists who out right deny it because of their literal interpretation of the bible. Yes, burden of proof...