"Atheist proves god does exist"

[Jan Ardena]

You are asking the wrong questions.
The question is: "Why are they right?" Or more to the point: Why are you right about the claim you made?
I have not made any claims, so how could I be right or wrong? About what?

I explained why they believe they are right, but obviously you
don't agree.
So the real question must be; why not?

The only claim I have made is that God is proven to exist to some,
and not agreed to be proven by others (you). This is a fact. Now the onus is on you to
explain why you disagree.

jan.

 

[Enmos]

I explained why they believe they are right, but obviously you
don't agree.
So the real question must be; why not?

Sure I agree that they believe that they are right. But that isn't even close to being evidence for God's existence.

The only claim I have made is that God is proven to exist to some,
and not agreed to be proven by others (you).

No. That's not what you said. You said:
"God has already been proven, it's just that you don't accept it."
The onus is on YOU to provide the evidence.

This is a fact.

What is? That God is proven to exists to some? Perhaps they believe that, but if there is actual proof I still like to see it.

Now the onus is on you to
explain why you disagree.

jan.

HA! You're funny

 

[Jan Ardena]

Enmos,

Sure I agree that they believe that they are right. But that isn't even close to being evidence for God's existence.

You mean it isn't close for you.
Which is what i'm saying.

No. That's not what you said. You said:
"God has already been proven, it's just that you don't accept it."
The onus is on YOU to provide the evidence.

God HAS already been proven to exist [for some], but you don't accept it.
That's what I meant.

What is? That God is proven to exists to some? Perhaps they believe that, but if there is actual proof I still like to see it.

Already done that.

HA! You're funny

That's not an answer.

jan.

 

[Enmos]

:wallbang:

You are simply incorrigible..
Never mind then.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Dywyddyr,
In answer to my question in post 159 which was;
''That matter is is product of consciousness?''
he answered;
''It isn't.''
Which is a claim.
Now, if you're intention is honest, ask him to back it up.
Okay.
jan.

And now you've started on the deceit.
I have already posted Spidergoat's answer - IN FULL.
Here it is again:

It isn't. Unless you have evidence otherwise?

I.e. there is no evidence to support your implicit claim in post 159.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Dywyddyr,

And now you've started on the deceit.

There's nothing deceptive at all.

I have already posted Spidergoat's answer - IN FULL.
Here it is again:

It isn't. Unless you have evidence otherwise?

It is in two parts. The first part answer my QUESTION;
''IT ISN'T'' which is a direct claim.
The second part asks me a question.

I.e. there is no evidence to support your implicit claim in post 159.

Do you know what a question mark is, and what it is used for?.
159 was a QUESTION not a claim.
Get over it.

jan.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Do you know what a question mark is, and what it is used for?.
159 was a QUESTION not a claim.
Get over it.
jan.

Wrong again:

I have no problem with reconsidering my whole world view. Is there anything that should warrant that?

That matter is is product of consciousness?
jan.

It was an implicit statement (phrased as rhetorical question) that Spidergoat should consider that matter is a product of consciousness.
Or maybe it's just one more example of inability with English...
YOU raised the point, not Spidergoat.

 

[Jan Ardena]

:wallbang:

You are simply incorrigible..
Never mind then.

No I'm not.
Most religious people will say God has been proven to exist.
Which is why I directed you to search for the information.

You disagree with them.
That was my point all along.

So how is an atheist going to prove the existence of God
to those for whom proof is already available.
And in the same breath, an atheist will not accept the proof offered
by religionists.

It all boils down to personal perception.

jan.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Wrong again:

It was an implicit statement (phrased as rhetorical question) that Spidergoat should consider that matter is a product of consciousness.
Or maybe it's just one more example of inability with English...
YOU raised the point, not Spidergoat.

Then you should have approached this differently
instead coming out with guns blazing.
How can we have a good dialouge with this kind of attitude.

I think there is meaning on both sides of the argument,
and as such we can learn from each other.

jan.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Then you should have approached this differently
instead coming out with guns blazing.

Huh?
YOU raised the point. YOU made a claim.
You have consistently failed to support it.

How can we have a good dialouge with this kind of attitude.

Exactly. Learn to admit your error and act like an adult.

I think there is meaning on both sides of the argument, and as such we can learn from each other.

Yet you have failed to provide any support for your "side". How then, do we learn from you?

 

[Jan Ardena]

Huh?
YOU raised the point. YOU made a claim.
You have consistently failed to support it.


Exactly. Learn to admit your error and act like an adult.


Yet you have failed to provide any support for your "side". How then, do we learn from you?

I didn't make a claim, I asked a question, complete
with question mark. Why are you being obstinate?

Maybe if you answer the question I posed, we can
move further on in the discussion.
That being said, we can probably learn from each other.

jan.

 

[Dywyddyr]

I didn't make a claim, I asked a question, complete with question mark. Why are you being obstinate?

You asked a question that wasn't pertinent AT ALL to the topic. That had no bearing whatsoever on the subject under discussion. UNLESS you were also (implicitly) suggesting that the idea was worth consideration - i.e. an implicit claim.
The way the "question" was used - as a reply indicates that you appear to consider it SHOULD have been taken into account. Once again - it was a point YOU raised.

And Spider correctly answered: it isn't worth consideration - unless there is evidence to the contrary.
Now, support your position.

 

[Enmos]

No Jan. It was a suggestion/request, not a question. As in: "Perhaps you'd like to consider the fact that matter is a product of consciousness?"
If it was a question you wouldn't have put the word "that" in front of the sentence.

 

[Jan Ardena]

You asked a question that wasn't pertinent AT ALL to the topic. That had no bearing whatsoever on the subject under discussion. UNLESS you were also (implicitly) suggesting that the idea was worth consideration - i.e. an implicit claim.
The way the "question" was used - as a reply indicates that you appear to consider it SHOULD have been taken into account. Once again - it was a point YOU raised.

And Spider correctly answered: it isn't worth consideration - unless there is evidence to the contrary.
Now, support your position.

Why wasn't it pertinent, in any way to the topic?
And why does it have no bearing on the subject under discussion?

And spider did not answer ''it isn't worth consideration'', and if he did
he should have made himself clear. As it stands, to anyone reading the dialogue, it is a direct answer to my question in the form of; ''IT ISN'T.''
And I am quite within my right to ask for an explanation.

You're being incredibly dis-honest.

jan.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Why wasn't it pertinent, in any way to the topic?
And why does it have no bearing on the subject under discussion?

Missed or ignored this did you?

UNLESS you were also (implicitly) suggesting that the idea was worth consideration - i.e. an implicit claim.

And spider did not answer ''it isn't worth consideration'', and if he did
he should have made himself clear. As it stands, to anyone reading the dialogue, it is a direct answer to my question in the form of; ''IT ISN'T.''

Try again:
Spider - Is there anything that should warrant [reconsidering] that?
You - That matter is is product of consciousness?
Spider - It isn't. Unless you have evidence otherwise?

And I am quite within my right to ask for an explanation.

The explanation was implicit: there is no evidence - unless YOU have some.

You're being incredibly dis-honest.

Wrong again.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Enmos,

No Jan. It was a suggestion/request, not a question. As in: "Perhaps you'd like to consider the fact that matter is a product of consciousness?"
If it was a question you wouldn't have put the word "that" in front of the sentence.

...Is there anything that should warrant that?

That matter is a product of consciousness?

The ''That'' is a response to spiders question, as in' there may be something that could warrant that.

jan.

 

[Dywyddyr]

The ''That'' is a response to spiders question, as in' there may be something that could warrant that.
jan.

Uh huh. And what, exactly, would that "something" be?

 

[Jan Ardena]

Dywyddyr,

Missed or ignored this did you?

I know what I was thinking when I made that reply.
You are infering what I was thinking in order to
prop up you weak and failed position.
We should stick to what is written, not make stuff up.

Try again:
Spider - Is there anything that should warrant [reconsidering] that?
You - That matter is is product of consciousness?
Spider - It isn't. Unless you have evidence otherwise?

Yeah!!!
So what's your point?

The explanation was implicit: there is no evidence - unless YOU have some.

Stop making stuff up, and deal with the evidence.
Isn't that a part of critical thinking?

Wrong again.

Err! Right again.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Uh huh. And what, exactly, would that "something" be?

So all of a sudden you can't read now?

jan.

 

[Dywyddyr]

I know what I was thinking when I made that reply.
You are infering what I was thinking in order to prop up you weak and failed position.
We should stick to what is written, not make stuff up.

So basically you're saying you're incapable of posting and making your point clear. Okay.

Stop making stuff up, and deal with the evidence.

There is no evidence, as Spider said. Unless YOU have some.
Which apparently you don't since you have STILL failed to provide any despite numerous requests.