Too subtle, EvilPoet, far too subtle. I recommend use of the caps lock at the very least.
Concerning what?Originally posted by Binary
I dealt with just as illogical and ignorant atheist.
Well done, you almost read the sentence. Rather than explain why non-communicable, subjective, mystical insight is problematic as evidence of God, I will ask you to consider this: 1.3 billion muslims can provide the same proof for their god. Since muslims and christians are monotheistic we have atleast 1 billion examples of arguments from religious experience being wrong. BTW, history is not just testimonial evidence it is archaeology, records and non-subjective accounts that don't attempt to verify anything as extrordinary as the supernatural.Originally posted by Voodoo Child
Testimonial evidence is non-verifiable so is useless as an objective proof. It can be explained equally well by psychology and sociology. Besides, if you are going to use fallacious appeals to popularity then the majority of the world does not believe in your God. Ergo, he does not exist.
Testimonial evidence is useless? Your plain stupid, history is testimonial evidence....Stupid...
If they were, then all that would be required would be their ferverent disbelief(and strong principles). You are using the same fallacious argument that I objected to in the first place. Belief is not contingent on reality.quote:
Originally posted by Voodoo Child
Non sequiter. If God did not exist and people believed he did they would still die and build churches. All that is required is their fervent belief. There are buildings that have been built for secular gatherings and atheistic religions which would be evidence of your God's non-existence, would it not?
Are they willing to be tortured to death to proclaim God dont exist?