Attila wrote:
> On Thu, 2 May 2024 10:34:33 +1000, Maximus
> <gladiator@colosseum.rome> in alt.atheism with message-id
> <l9g5cuFglehU1@mid.individual.net> wrote:
>
>> Attila wrote:
>>> On Wed, 1 May 2024 01:01:01 +1000, Maximus
>>> <gladiator@colosseum.rome> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>> <l9cfdfFu7b8U1@mid.individual.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Attila wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 22:57:53 +1000, Maximus
>>>>> <gladiator@colosseum.rome> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>>>> <l9c86kFt574U1@mid.individual.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Attila wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 21:43:47 +1000, Maximus
>>>>>>> <gladiator@colosseum.rome> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>>>>>> <l9c3rjFsglgU1@mid.individual.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Attila wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 18:18:28 +1000, Maximus
>>>>>>>>> <gladiator@colosseum.rome> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>>>>>>>> <l9bnqmFqncgU1@mid.individual.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Attila wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 11:59:25 +1000, Maximus
>>>>>>>>>>> <gladiator@colosseum.rome> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>>>>>>>>>> <l9b1k0FniudU1@mid.individual.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Attila wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 28 Apr 2024 21:38:00 -0700, The Starmaker
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> in alt.atheism with message-id
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <662F2428.72E6@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Starmaker wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Atheism is a belief, it's not a science.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Religious beliefs and Atheism beliefs are both on the same level of ...beliefs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Atheist are confident that there is no God, as Religions are confident that there is a God.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They are are both on the same level of ...beliefs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not really. Theists postulate the existence of something
>>>>>>>>>>>>> without any supporting evidence for that existence.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I disagree. billions of believers and personal testimony is evidence.
>>>>>>>>>>> Personal testimony is never evidence
>>>>>>>>>> any court would disagree with you
>>>>>>>>> It is well known that personal testimony is the poorest kind
>>>>>>>>> of evidence.
>>>>>>>> maybe, but still evidence. and it's relative to numbers. if twenty pp
>>>>>>>> say they saw me run down a pedestrian in my car, that carries more
>>>>>>>> weight than if just one person says it.
>>>>>>> I agree - it is evidence. It just isn't very useful
>>>>>>> evidence.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The value of eyewitnesses:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJG698U2Mvo
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubNF9QNEQLA
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ahg6qcgoay4
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bnnmWYI0lM
>>>>>>>> I'm not going to watch all those, sorry. (see comment below)
>>>>>>> Any one will do. They all show what you see may not be
>>>>>>> reality.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> since there is no way
>>>>>>>>>>> to support it.
>>>>>>>>>>> As far as the "belief of billions" is
>>>>>>>>>>> concerned there are hundreds of different beliefs in there
>>>>>>>>>>> and they can't all be correct.
>>>>>>>>>> I was referring to Xtianity and Islam primarily
>>>>>>>>> How about Hindu?
>>>>>>>> about 1.2 billion. but Christians and Islamists make up over 50% of all
>>>>>>>> religious faiths.
>>>>>>> So what? That doesn't mean any of them are valid.
>>>>>> no, but your point is there's no evidence. I say it's evidence the
>>>>>> beliefs could be valid.
>>>>> Or not. There is no actual evidence that would convince
>>>>> someone either way.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There are hundreds of others. In fact
>>>>>>>>> there are many, many different Christian beliefs.
>>>>>>>> yes. I'm just saying it's not as you say that there's no evidence. for
>>>>>>>> example believers spend a lot of money in support of their faith. just
>>>>>>>> near where I am there's a 7th day Adventist complex worth many millions
>>>>>>>> of dollars. also many intelligent ppl have religious beliefs. in fact
>>>>>>>> theists vastly outnumber us. you can't just dismiss such things as being
>>>>>>>> no evidence that there may be some validity to their beliefs.
>>>>>>> Or not. There is exactly the same support either way.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> but at the
>>>>>>>> end of the day, I look at what the beliefs actually are. when one does
>>>>>>>> that, it's not so difficult to dismiss them as nonsense. eg. xtians
>>>>>>>> believe they will live in mansions, and walk on streets paved with gold
>>>>>>>> in some god adoring afterlife, and muslims believe they will get 70
>>>>>>>> virgins if they die as martyrs.
>>>>>>> Most religions have common factors - rewards for believers
>>>>>>> and painful punishment for non-believers.
>>>>>>> Basically there is no actual supporting evidence either way
>>>>>>> for anything involving religion. That is why faith was
>>>>>>> invented. Faith is belief without evidence - for those who
>>>>>>> believe in such.
>>>>>> no, faith is belief without proof
>>>>> Proof - evidence - either way it is the same thing. No
>>>>> facts.
>>>> no. evidence is not proof. evidence is just something that supports a
>>>> conclusion.
>>> True, but usually evidence has some validity factor.
>>>
>>> Just what is evidence is usually left to the judgment of the
>>> parties involved, which makes unsupported evidence useless.
>>> Meaningful evidence is unambiguous, unrelated, verifiable
>>> and credible.
>>>
>> unsupported evidence is not useless. all evidence is evaluated on it's
>> credibility. if there's a murder and I say I saw it happen, but no one
>> else did, that still needs to be investigated.
> True but without corroboration there would be little result.
>
>>>>> A fact is a statement that can be verified. It can be proven
>>>>> to be true or false through objective evidence. No religion
>>>>> has this.
>>>> yes they do. Muhammad is an historical person, as is Jesus
>>> Absolutely correct but there is no unambiguous, unrelated,
>>> verifiable and credible evidence that they were any
>>> different from any John Doe off any street.
>> the impact they had on the world suggests otherwise
> Ra and Osiris had a similar impact on their world.
>
>>> Simply
>>> accepting (or proving) someone with that name existed at a
>>> certain time and place proves nothing.
>>>
>>> There is no independent and unrelated supporting evidence.
>>>>>> . the gospels for example are a basis
>>>>>> for Xtian faith
>>>>> Or for any other religion. None of them have anything
>>>>> beyond faith. Your gospels are accepted as being true
>>>>> without any supporting evidence.
>>>> the gospels are evidence for the events they contain
>>> Your acceptance of them as evidence does nothing to actually
>>> validate them
>> nevertheless they are still evidence for what they contain. your claim
>> is there's no evidence for religious belief, not that there's no proof.
>> just as sporting organizations, clubs, and participants are evidence for
>> their sport, ie. that the sport exists, Churches and Mosques and the
>> believers (billions of them) are evidence for their God. ie. that the
>> God exists, or there wouldn't be any Churches or Mosques. to me this
>> seem obvious.
> Nonsense. Evidence without factual support is about as
> useless as can be imagined.
>
> "Oh, look! A pile of poop! That proves there is a god!"
> "Oh, look! A rock! That proves there is a god!"
> "Oh, look! A bug! That proves there is a god!"
> "Oh, look! A ham sandwich! That proves there is a god!"
>
> Take your pick. For some that is all the evidence that is
> needed.
>
>>> Such validation requires unambiguous,
>>> unrelated, verifiable and credible evidence,
>>>
>>>> it's irrelevant
>>>> whether those events are true or not. they are still evidence. but some
>>>> things in the gospels are known to be factual. Bart Ehrman is a (very)
>>>> good authority on this.
>>> Nothing beyond some physical locations and independently
>>> verified historical figures. None of the mystical or
>>> supernatural claims are independently supported.
>> yes
> Therefore belief or non-belief can be as simple as flipping
> a coin.

of course ppl can believe or not, as with anything, like UFO's, or
Bigfoot, or whatever

> Except belief under these conditions also requires
> belief in anything including vampires, elves, giants,
> dragons, werewolves, and shape shifters.
>

that's a stupid argument. belief in some thing doesn't create any
obligation to believe in some other thing.

> --
>
>

--
“Atheism is the birth right of all human, remember that!”- hhyapster 7.4.23

"Christian beliefs fail against reason, facts, and knowledge"

"Religion is not about truth, it's about lifestyle"

"God is a convenient explanation for what man does not understand.
The less that's inexplicable, the less need for a 'God' explanation."

"The problem with theism is that it never remains within
the realm of belief, but invariably proceeds to assertion"