It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
away with your pedantic arguments! All mathematical theories can be proven true given enough computing power. Wait, what about the mathematical proof that adding two even numbers always results in an even result? What about the law of divisibility by three?
Somethings can be proven beyond being a theory as long as the particular circumstances around the event are constant.
As to your claim that all mathematical statements can be proven, seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del's_incompleteness_theorem
A clinical study can be proven 100% for the given situation but it does not prove the theory as a whole, it only proves that in that one exact situation it holds true (or false.)
Somethings can be proven beyond being a theory as long as the particular circumstances around the event are constant
To me it depends on who starts the discussion. Sine the person who does so is usually the one making the claim, they are the ones that are required to give proof to support their claim. Doesn't matter what position you have.
II must be nuts to bring such a simple line to an argument like this :P
How can you prove something that you do not even understand?If I asked you, right now, to prove how and why gravity works, could you? Or do you simply blindly accept the "theory" of how gravity works?
However, the fundamental christian god and Christians, makes many testable claims, from historical events to the healing power of prayer to the resurrection of Jesus. All of these can be analysed and shown to be fallacious.
As for the resurrection of Jesus, I believe the Bible.
Just jumping back for a second on translations issue:
What about the Bible makes it an accurate historical document, much less a scientific treatise? Generously assuming that it hasn't undergone changes in the last ~1600 or so years of translations and transcriptions, the New Testament in its current form was compiled centuries after the events it described. No other document, given such a pedigree, would be accepted as a historically authoritative source, not without a great deal of supporting documentation. The very secular interests of the Catholic church for much of that history only clouds the issue further.
You guys shouldn't be demanding evidence, you should be arguing who needs to provide that evidence.
You guys shouldn't be demanding evidence, you should be arguing who needs to provide that evidence.Why shouldn't we? There is no argument about who needs to provide the evidence, it is purely upon the religious to provide it. Why do we put an automatic protection to those who believe in god/gods? There is absolutely no reason why we shouldn't demand evidence. You may ask, why do you care?Thisis why I care.
Perhaps a demand of evidence is part of the natural progression of this thread...Nay-sayers, it is not your burden to provide evidence, but it is also not your place to press your ideas on the other side...If this is your belief, do not feel that you need to convince others of it. And that goes double for the atheists.
The purpose of that post was to calm the several slightly more vicious comments in this thread to those believers. I am an atheist, and I know why you want answers, but to press your ideas on others makes you just as bad as the religious fanatics who try to press theirs on you(and not you, of course, WaterIsPoison, I use "you" in the general sense). That was my one and only point I intended to make in that post and I made it with the intention of keeping the thread from growing vicious as opposed to intellectual.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."
It is not merely permissible, but noble and admirable to both point out when someone else is wrong, and to admit when you yourself are wrong. We must decide as a society that the truth, logic and rationality are more important than the possibility of some people's feelings being hurt.
That's where you are wrong, Scott. I entirely deny any authority anyone has here to declare what is 100% true and right or completely fallacious and wrong. It's rather arrogant of you to put atheists in a more noble or admiral position than anyone else. To say that there is no possibility of anything else being true is entirely out of anyone's jurisdiction, including yours. Whether or NOT there is a god and if any god that exists is my God or not, I have every right to believe what I choose and no one on this forum is in any place to tell me what I should believe.