Why do the God-haters persist?

[Boss]

how could the example not be based on an awareness - you are just stupid.

Well first of all, I never claimed that things don't have 'awareness' because most every living thing is 'aware' of it's environment and reacts accordingly. My argument was "spiritual awareness" and I don't see where you have demonstrated that here. Secondly, I never said that you are wrong, I just said you haven't shown me evidence to prove you're right. I respectfully admitted you could be right, and you return my respect by calling me stupid.

where did you "respectfully admitted" there could be awareness in your 1st response - "or action based upon that awareness".

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8841004-post650.html

"Show me evidence Flora has awareness of right and wrong and acts upon it, and I will agree that Flora has spiritual awareness. Until then, I can't say I see evidence of this, it's an interesting proposition and maybe you are correct, but you need more than an opinion to validate your argument."

what specifically in the example leads you to believe there is not a demonstrative awareness and deliberation of content exhibited by the Orchid ?

I've never argued that living things show no awareness of their environment or react accordingly. I'm not sure what "deliberation of content" means.. did the orchid debate whether or not to bloom or which colors it would wear today? Do you have any evidence to support that idea? I see nothing to indicate the orchid had "spiritual awareness" of any kind. Again... not claiming that it didn't... not saying it's impossible. interesting theory... could be right... I just am not seeing the evidence of it, nor do I believe the orchid is making moral decisions of right and wrong in any way.

My argument was "spiritual awareness" and I don't see where you have demonstrated that here.

are you saying all Orchids are the same -

I have said to you before, no two blades of grass from 700 million years ago to this day or for all eternity will ever be the same - you do not understand your own premise of spirituality - as no other life is the same by definition each life its own spiritual "awareness" to everything around it. and for the religious to prosper forever in the Everlasting.

Why is it that I clearly state things, post them in plain English, use easy to understand words and phrases, and people assume I am "saying" something completely different? I have never argued that living things have no 'awareness' of environment, that is patently idiotic. Plants do not have consciousness or conscious awareness. Animals have consciousness and conscious awareness and they make conscious decisions. Humans are the only animals I am aware of that make consciously aware decisions based on a sense of moral right and wrong.

You can have a different opinion, but you've simply not shown me any evidence that what I said is not true. I'm open minded, I'm all ears... show me the evidence! Posting a picture of a flower exhibiting that living things are aware of environment, as if this is something I didn't know or understand, is NOT proving your point.

 

[MrMax]

Again, try to comprehend this in your pea-sized little brain... PROOF is subjective. ALL PROOF! It is totally dependent on what you accept as valid evidence. I presented evidence, you rejected it. You did not refute it, you rejected it. We're all free to reject anything we please, it does not ever mean that we refuted it.

bullshit hot water is not hot because you accept the evidence...it is because it is ....spirituality is subjective as because there is no testable evidence to prove it ....

No it isn't. It's very cool compared to lava.

There is testable evidence to prove spirituality. You have to first accept that spiritual nature exists and is real. Once you can do that, it's very easy to test and confirm it... billions and billions have done so.

You have to have evidence to make that statement real, just like you said here; "you need to provide EVIDENCE. That means more than the ACLUs opinion or a court finding in an unrelated case. It means actual confirmed and verified scientific tests and observations which have been peer reviewed and published. "

 

[Boss]

bullshit hot water is not hot because you accept the evidence...it is because it is ....spirituality is subjective as because there is no testable evidence to prove it ....

No it isn't. It's very cool compared to lava.

There is testable evidence to prove spirituality. You have to first accept that spiritual nature exists and is real. Once you can do that, it's very easy to test and confirm it... billions and billions have done so.

You have to have evidence to make that statement real, just like you said here; "you need to provide EVIDENCE. That means more than the ACLUs opinion or a court finding in an unrelated case. It means actual confirmed and verified scientific tests and observations which have been peer reviewed and published. "

Well, the "evidence" is the billions and billions of people who testify to the power of God in their daily lives. All kinds of miraculous stories of healing the doctors can't explain, survival of the most hopeless odds, perseverance through the worst of storms, the enabling of unknowable personal strength to accomplish the impossible. These people offer first-hand accounts of their own personal "experiment" and it's results. They swear it was through their faith in the power of God and they believe it with all their heart. They write and publish books about how God has changed their lives, shelves and shelves full of them. They become inspiring motivational speakers, sharing their stories with their peers.

Like dark energy, dark matter, black holes, a universe expanding faster than the speed of light... there is not a "physical" explanation. Like gravity, time and space, there is not a "physical" component. It falls outside the bounds of "physical" sciences, but it is every much as real as the aforementioned phenomena. Nearly every great mind that has ever existed has acknowledged this. BUT... It REQUIRES you to accept and believe spiritual nature exists. Until you can do that, it's not possible to prove it.

 

[MrMax]

No it isn't. It's very cool compared to lava.

There is testable evidence to prove spirituality. You have to first accept that spiritual nature exists and is real. Once you can do that, it's very easy to test and confirm it... billions and billions have done so.

You have to have evidence to make that statement real, just like you said here; "you need to provide EVIDENCE. That means more than the ACLUs opinion or a court finding in an unrelated case. It means actual confirmed and verified scientific tests and observations which have been peer reviewed and published. "

Well, the "evidence" is the billions and billions of people who testify to the power of God in their daily lives. All kinds of miraculous stories of healing the doctors can't explain, survival of the most hopeless odds, perseverance through the worst of storms, the enabling of unknowable personal strength to accomplish the impossible. These people offer first-hand accounts of their own personal "experiment" and it's results. They swear it was through their faith in the power of God and they believe it with all their heart. They write and publish books about how God has changed their lives, shelves and shelves full of them. They become inspiring motivational speakers, sharing their stories with their peers.

Like dark energy, dark matter, black holes, a universe expanding faster than the speed of light... there is not a "physical" explanation. Like gravity, time and space, there is not a "physical" component. It falls outside the bounds of "physical" sciences, but it is every much as real as the aforementioned phenomena. Nearly every great mind that has ever existed has acknowledged this. BUT... It REQUIRES you to accept and believe spiritual nature exists. Until you can do that, it's not possible to prove it.

So you have no real evidence. Billions of people believing in invisible superbeings is only proof of possible mass delusion or ignorance, not any sort of proof of anything real.

 

[hangover]

So you have no real evidence. Billions of people believing in invisible superbeings is only proof of possible mass delusion or ignorance, not any sort of proof of anything real.

Everything that exists is REAL evidence. Just because you refuse to see it, is your problem. Fanaticism also prevents evangelicals from seeing the "evidence" of the world being more that 6,000 years old.

 

[MrMax]

So you have no real evidence. Billions of people believing in invisible superbeings is only proof of possible mass delusion or ignorance, not any sort of proof of anything real.

Everything that exists is REAL evidence. Just because you refuse to see it, is your problem. Fanaticism also prevents evangelicals from seeing the "evidence" of the world being more that 6,000 years old.

Sorry, but just having a lot of people agree that we descend from aliens is not proof, just wishful thinking.

 

[BreezeWood]

BUT... It REQUIRES you to accept and believe spiritual nature exists.

............

I see nothing to indicate the orchid had "spiritual awareness" of any kind ... I just am not seeing the evidence of it.

... I just am not seeing the evidence of it.

King James Bible

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

by having read and accepted the above you will forever not see the evidence made plainly visible to the True Believers of the Everlasting.


Why do the God-haters persist?

"when Moses actually saw them he destroyed the most sacred and precious things ever given to mankind before anyone else had a chance to see them."

where is Christianities condemnation of the greatest sinner ever to walk upon Earth ?

at any rate Boss, you follow the script of Christianity - when you see what you do not like, you destroy it. - - > Earth.

.

 

[Boss]

You have to have evidence to make that statement real, just like you said here; "you need to provide EVIDENCE. That means more than the ACLUs opinion or a court finding in an unrelated case. It means actual confirmed and verified scientific tests and observations which have been peer reviewed and published. "

Well, the "evidence" is the billions and billions of people who testify to the power of God in their daily lives. All kinds of miraculous stories of healing the doctors can't explain, survival of the most hopeless odds, perseverance through the worst of storms, the enabling of unknowable personal strength to accomplish the impossible. These people offer first-hand accounts of their own personal "experiment" and it's results. They swear it was through their faith in the power of God and they believe it with all their heart. They write and publish books about how God has changed their lives, shelves and shelves full of them. They become inspiring motivational speakers, sharing their stories with their peers.

Like dark energy, dark matter, black holes, a universe expanding faster than the speed of light... there is not a "physical" explanation. Like gravity, time and space, there is not a "physical" component. It falls outside the bounds of "physical" sciences, but it is every much as real as the aforementioned phenomena. Nearly every great mind that has ever existed has acknowledged this. BUT... It REQUIRES you to accept and believe spiritual nature exists. Until you can do that, it's not possible to prove it.

So you have no real evidence. Billions of people believing in invisible superbeings is only proof of possible mass delusion or ignorance, not any sort of proof of anything real.

No, I gave you the evidence and you just rejected it. It's not any different than you giving me evidence to support a theory of gravity and me rejecting it. Doesn't change a thing. Evidence is subject to what you are willing to accept as such. I can't change that, it's just how things are. If you reject my evidence, that's your prerogative, it doesn't negate or change the validity of the evidence in any way.

This "mass delusional ignorance" theory you have is not supportable with science. If it were true, humans would have abandoned the attribute long ago. Instead, the attribute of human spirituality has persevered and thrived, through centuries of oppression, millions of martyrs, scores of executions and persecutions clearly not conducive with survival of the species. so your theory isn't even supportable by Darwinian natural selection.

It is the opinion of an ignorant moron who is incapable of thinking beyond your own parameters of understanding. You are not much different than the monkey in the zoo, existing for our entertainment in your antics and amusement of simple curiosity, but unable to comprehend the world outside your environment.

 

[Boss]

BUT... It REQUIRES you to accept and believe spiritual nature exists.

............

I see nothing to indicate the orchid had "spiritual awareness" of any kind ... I just am not seeing the evidence of it.

... I just am not seeing the evidence of it.

King James Bible

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

by having read and accepted the above you will forever not see the evidence made plainly visible to the True Believers of the Everlasting.


Why do the God-haters persist?

"when Moses actually saw them he destroyed the most sacred and precious things ever given to mankind before anyone else had a chance to see them."

where is Christianities condemnation of the greatest sinner ever to walk upon Earth ?

at any rate Boss, you follow the script of Christianity - when you see what you do not like, you destroy it. - - > Earth.

.

Why are you quoting scriptures from the Bible and applying them to me, a person who has repeatedly stated he is not a Christian? What part of the conversation we were having had anything to do with religious scriptures or interpretations of them? Where in the hell did I claim I wanted to destroy the Earth because I didn't like something? You're becoming as ******* delusional as MrMax, I hope his retardation isn't contagious.

 

[MrMax]

Well, the "evidence" is the billions and billions of people who testify to the power of God in their daily lives. All kinds of miraculous stories of healing the doctors can't explain, survival of the most hopeless odds, perseverance through the worst of storms, the enabling of unknowable personal strength to accomplish the impossible. These people offer first-hand accounts of their own personal "experiment" and it's results. They swear it was through their faith in the power of God and they believe it with all their heart. They write and publish books about how God has changed their lives, shelves and shelves full of them. They become inspiring motivational speakers, sharing their stories with their peers.

Like dark energy, dark matter, black holes, a universe expanding faster than the speed of light... there is not a "physical" explanation. Like gravity, time and space, there is not a "physical" component. It falls outside the bounds of "physical" sciences, but it is every much as real as the aforementioned phenomena. Nearly every great mind that has ever existed has acknowledged this. BUT... It REQUIRES you to accept and believe spiritual nature exists. Until you can do that, it's not possible to prove it.

So you have no real evidence. Billions of people believing in invisible superbeings is only proof of possible mass delusion or ignorance, not any sort of proof of anything real.

No, I gave you the evidence and you just rejected it. It's not any different than you giving me evidence to support a theory of gravity and me rejecting it. Doesn't change a thing. Evidence is subject to what you are willing to accept as such. I can't change that, it's just how things are. If you reject my evidence, that's your prerogative, it doesn't negate or change the validity of the evidence in any way.

This "mass delusional ignorance" theory you have is not supportable with science. If it were true, humans would have abandoned the attribute long ago. Instead, the attribute of human spirituality has persevered and thrived, through centuries of oppression, millions of martyrs, scores of executions and persecutions clearly not conducive with survival of the species. so your theory isn't even supportable by Darwinian natural selection.

It is the opinion of an ignorant moron who is incapable of thinking beyond your own parameters of understanding. You are not much different than the monkey in the zoo, existing for our entertainment in your antics and amusement of simple curiosity, but unable to comprehend the world outside your environment.

Dark energy and black holes... Have physical measurable effects that we can see. Your spiritual energy doesn't. Comparing the two is nonsense. ****, are you ever a dumb noob.

 

[thebrucebeat]

No it isn't. It's very cool compared to lava.

There is testable evidence to prove spirituality. You have to first accept that spiritual nature exists and is real. Once you can do that, it's very easy to test and confirm it... billions and billions have done so.

You have to have evidence to make that statement real, just like you said here; "you need to provide EVIDENCE. That means more than the ACLUs opinion or a court finding in an unrelated case. It means actual confirmed and verified scientific tests and observations which have been peer reviewed and published. "

Well, the "evidence" is the billions and billions of people who testify to the power of God in their daily lives. All kinds of miraculous stories of healing the doctors can't explain, survival of the most hopeless odds, perseverance through the worst of storms, the enabling of unknowable personal strength to accomplish the impossible. These people offer first-hand accounts of their own personal "experiment" and it's results. They swear it was through their faith in the power of God and they believe it with all their heart. They write and publish books about how God has changed their lives, shelves and shelves full of them. They become inspiring motivational speakers, sharing their stories with their peers.

Like dark energy, dark matter, black holes, a universe expanding faster than the speed of light... there is not a "physical" explanation. Like gravity, time and space, there is not a "physical" component. It falls outside the bounds of "physical" sciences, but it is every much as real as the aforementioned phenomena. Nearly every great mind that has ever existed has acknowledged this. BUT... It REQUIRES you to accept and believe spiritual nature exists. Until you can do that, it's not possible to prove it.

Every great mind? You don't say.
A bit of hyperbole there, in the extreme.
Your argument boils down to "that which can not be explained has a default explanation of the supernatural, and the best evidence for that is anecdotal".
Does that sum it up pretty well?
Does the belief of millions of Muslims mean that they are right? Is that the argument you are making?
Or is it the 330 million Buddhists that have it right?
Most people on the planet are not Christians, so your argument that the numbers prove anything is clearly fallacious.
If you have to believe it before you can prove it, that isn't proof. It's investment.
You are clearly deeply invested.

 

[Boss]

So you have no real evidence. Billions of people believing in invisible superbeings is only proof of possible mass delusion or ignorance, not any sort of proof of anything real.

No, I gave you the evidence and you just rejected it. It's not any different than you giving me evidence to support a theory of gravity and me rejecting it. Doesn't change a thing. Evidence is subject to what you are willing to accept as such. I can't change that, it's just how things are. If you reject my evidence, that's your prerogative, it doesn't negate or change the validity of the evidence in any way.

This "mass delusional ignorance" theory you have is not supportable with science. If it were true, humans would have abandoned the attribute long ago. Instead, the attribute of human spirituality has persevered and thrived, through centuries of oppression, millions of martyrs, scores of executions and persecutions clearly not conducive with survival of the species. so your theory isn't even supportable by Darwinian natural selection.

It is the opinion of an ignorant moron who is incapable of thinking beyond your own parameters of understanding. You are not much different than the monkey in the zoo, existing for our entertainment in your antics and amusement of simple curiosity, but unable to comprehend the world outside your environment.

Dark energy and black holes... Have physical measurable effects that we can see. Your spiritual energy doesn't. Comparing the two is nonsense. ****, are you ever a dumb noob.

Sorry but you're wrong. We can see the physically measurable effects of human spirituality.

 

[thebrucebeat]

No, I gave you the evidence and you just rejected it. It's not any different than you giving me evidence to support a theory of gravity and me rejecting it. Doesn't change a thing. Evidence is subject to what you are willing to accept as such. I can't change that, it's just how things are. If you reject my evidence, that's your prerogative, it doesn't negate or change the validity of the evidence in any way.

This "mass delusional ignorance" theory you have is not supportable with science. If it were true, humans would have abandoned the attribute long ago. Instead, the attribute of human spirituality has persevered and thrived, through centuries of oppression, millions of martyrs, scores of executions and persecutions clearly not conducive with survival of the species. so your theory isn't even supportable by Darwinian natural selection.

It is the opinion of an ignorant moron who is incapable of thinking beyond your own parameters of understanding. You are not much different than the monkey in the zoo, existing for our entertainment in your antics and amusement of simple curiosity, but unable to comprehend the world outside your environment.

Dark energy and black holes... Have physical measurable effects that we can see. Your spiritual energy doesn't. Comparing the two is nonsense. ****, are you ever a dumb noob.

Sorry but you're wrong. We can see the physically measurable effects of human spirituality.

Great. Share them with citations that show the data. This should be fascinating.

 

[Boss]

You have to have evidence to make that statement real, just like you said here; "you need to provide EVIDENCE. That means more than the ACLUs opinion or a court finding in an unrelated case. It means actual confirmed and verified scientific tests and observations which have been peer reviewed and published. "

Well, the "evidence" is the billions and billions of people who testify to the power of God in their daily lives. All kinds of miraculous stories of healing the doctors can't explain, survival of the most hopeless odds, perseverance through the worst of storms, the enabling of unknowable personal strength to accomplish the impossible. These people offer first-hand accounts of their own personal "experiment" and it's results. They swear it was through their faith in the power of God and they believe it with all their heart. They write and publish books about how God has changed their lives, shelves and shelves full of them. They become inspiring motivational speakers, sharing their stories with their peers.

Like dark energy, dark matter, black holes, a universe expanding faster than the speed of light... there is not a "physical" explanation. Like gravity, time and space, there is not a "physical" component. It falls outside the bounds of "physical" sciences, but it is every much as real as the aforementioned phenomena. Nearly every great mind that has ever existed has acknowledged this. BUT... It REQUIRES you to accept and believe spiritual nature exists. Until you can do that, it's not possible to prove it.

Every great mind? You don't say.

You're right, I didn't say! I said NEARLY every great mind, didn't I? Yes, I did. So we see that you begin your tirade with a completely dishonest assertion of what was said. Is this because you lack the ability to comprehend language? Or are you just flat out dishonest about the things you do comprehend?

A bit of hyperbole there, in the extreme.

Nothing hyperbolic about it, I stated the truth. Then you distorted it.

Your argument boils down to "that which can not be explained has a default explanation of the supernatural, and the best evidence for that is anecdotal".
Does that sum it up pretty well?

Not my argument at all. There is nothing "supernatural" about human spirituality, it is as clearly a part of nature as the nose on your face. It has been present in man since the beginning. The spiritual evidence is not anecdotal, it is overwhelming, you just choose to reject it.

Now, to address your inane point about "explanation" ...spiritual belief doesn't explain anything. This is why man invented science, to explain things. The person who believes spirituality explains anything is no more rational than the person who thinks science explains everything.

Does the belief of millions of Muslims mean that they are right? Is that the argument you are making? Or is it the 330 million Buddhists that have it right?

I'll defer to my previous comments... I type in coherent sentences using plain English and mostly common terminology the average person can comprehend. There is not a rational reason for you to interject things into what I've said that were not said. If that was what I wanted to say, believe me, I would have said it. If that had been my argument, I would have stated it as such. I did not.

Most people on the planet are not Christians, so your argument that the numbers prove anything is clearly fallacious.

I've made no argument that most people are Christians. I've not argued that numbers "prove" anything. I merely offered evidence, you can choose to accept it or not accept it. I have repeatedly stated that I am not a Christian. I don't know how else to type that to make this point, is there some other way that I can get that point inside your closed mind? I am not arguing on behalf of Christianity or ANY religion for that matter. Human spirituality FAR predates ANY religious doctrine.

If you have to believe it before you can prove it, that isn't proof. It's investment.
You are clearly deeply invested.

Name any goddamn thing you want to that you don't have to believe in order to accept it as proof? You are simply making an ignorant point that doesn't even comport with logic. EVERYTHING you believe as "proof" you have to first believe. It's not possible to believe anything is proof, yet not believe it. This is probably the most absurd and ridiculous comment I've read in my time on this forum. And that's saying something.

 

[Boss]

Great. Share them with citations that show the data. This should be fascinating.

Human history. DONE!

 

[thebrucebeat]

Great. Share them with citations that show the data. This should be fascinating.

Human history. DONE!

Where are the citations I asked for? You do know what those are, right?
Give me data, baby!
You are making claims.
You bear the burden of proof.

 

[thebrucebeat]

Well, the "evidence" is the billions and billions of people who testify to the power of God in their daily lives. All kinds of miraculous stories of healing the doctors can't explain, survival of the most hopeless odds, perseverance through the worst of storms, the enabling of unknowable personal strength to accomplish the impossible. These people offer first-hand accounts of their own personal "experiment" and it's results. They swear it was through their faith in the power of God and they believe it with all their heart. They write and publish books about how God has changed their lives, shelves and shelves full of them. They become inspiring motivational speakers, sharing their stories with their peers.

Like dark energy, dark matter, black holes, a universe expanding faster than the speed of light... there is not a "physical" explanation. Like gravity, time and space, there is not a "physical" component. It falls outside the bounds of "physical" sciences, but it is every much as real as the aforementioned phenomena. Nearly every great mind that has ever existed has acknowledged this. BUT... It REQUIRES you to accept and believe spiritual nature exists. Until you can do that, it's not possible to prove it.

Every great mind? You don't say.

You're right, I didn't say! I said NEARLY every great mind, didn't I? Yes, I did. So we see that you begin your tirade with a completely dishonest assertion of what was said. Is this because you lack the ability to comprehend language? Or are you just flat out dishonest about the things you do comprehend?



Nothing hyperbolic about it, I stated the truth. Then you distorted it.



Not my argument at all. There is nothing "supernatural" about human spirituality, it is as clearly a part of nature as the nose on your face. It has been present in man since the beginning. The spiritual evidence is not anecdotal, it is overwhelming, you just choose to reject it.

Now, to address your inane point about "explanation" ...spiritual belief doesn't explain anything. This is why man invented science, to explain things. The person who believes spirituality explains anything is no more rational than the person who thinks science explains everything.



I'll defer to my previous comments... I type in coherent sentences using plain English and mostly common terminology the average person can comprehend. There is not a rational reason for you to interject things into what I've said that were not said. If that was what I wanted to say, believe me, I would have said it. If that had been my argument, I would have stated it as such. I did not.

Most people on the planet are not Christians, so your argument that the numbers prove anything is clearly fallacious.

I've made no argument that most people are Christians. I've not argued that numbers "prove" anything. I merely offered evidence, you can choose to accept it or not accept it. I have repeatedly stated that I am not a Christian. I don't know how else to type that to make this point, is there some other way that I can get that point inside your closed mind? I am not arguing on behalf of Christianity or ANY religion for that matter. Human spirituality FAR predates ANY religious doctrine.

If you have to believe it before you can prove it, that isn't proof. It's investment.
You are clearly deeply invested.

Name any goddamn thing you want to that you don't have to believe in order to accept it as proof? You are simply making an ignorant point that doesn't even comport with logic. EVERYTHING you believe as "proof" you have to first believe. It's not possible to believe anything is proof, yet not believe it. This is probably the most absurd and ridiculous comment I've read in my time on this forum. And that's saying something.

Wow, testy!
While I freely admit that I made an assumption about the Christian bent of your position, you are making the case for the belief in God, or god, and that is being supported by the vast numbers of people that believe it, which is nothing more than anecdotal evidence. The volume of it doesn't change that. It is still anecdotal. I haven't rejected anything. You haven't provided any. Wow me.
"Nearly every great mind". My apology. Still hyperbole. Doesn't change an iota of what I said.
As far as the spiritual "explaining" things, this is what you are saying. You list all the unexplained things and you attribute them to people's belief in god, because they believe it to be so.
Many people believe things because they have been proven to them. Your argument suggests that proof is available only after you invest in the belief. You think belief comes first. I think the proof does. I think that "believing precedes proof" is delusional, so there you go.
Swear at me some more!
That was exciting!

 

[MrMax]

Great. Share them with citations that show the data. This should be fascinating.

Human history. DONE!

 

[Boss]

Wow, testy!
While I freely admit that I made an assumption about the Christian bent of your position, you are making the case for the belief in God, or god, and that is being supported by the vast numbers of people that believe it, which is nothing more than anecdotal evidence.

Well, no hard head, it is not. Things aren't "anecdotal" simply because you've proclaimed them to be. I'm sorry that you feel someone bestowed the gift of rationality upon you alone, and only you get to decide these things. I assure you, everyone who believes in God doesn't share your opinion the evidence is anecdotal. That is your opinion and you are entitled to it, but you can't infer your opinion on everyone else. Sorry!

The volume of it doesn't change that. It is still anecdotal. I haven't rejected anything. You haven't provided any. Wow me.

Oh, but indeed I did provide it, and you rejected it as anecdotal. Wow you!

"Nearly every great mind". My apology. Still hyperbole. Doesn't change an iota of what I said.

Well, yes it most certainly does change it. Nearly doesn't equate to every, not in any ******* dictionary I've ever encountered. So it completely changes the meaning of what was said, and you were completely dishonest about it, as you are continuing to be dishonest in claiming it doesn't change anything. We can see by this that you are not an honest person, you lie and when you're caught lying, you lie some more to cover up the first lie. This is probably because you lack a true moral compass, which is caused by your lack of a spiritual connection.

As far as the spiritual "explaining" things, this is what you are saying. You list all the unexplained things and you attribute them to people's belief in god, because they believe it to be so.

Well, no I didn't do that. Again, you simply feel compelled to lie. I've attributed nothing unexplained to anyone's belief in God. In fact, I said quite the opposite. If someone believes spirituality explains anything, they are as irrational and misguided as someone who claims science explains everything.

Many people believe things because they have been proven to them.

Yep... Like the power of God or Spiritual Nature.

Your argument suggests that proof is available only after you invest in the belief.

No, my argument doesn't "suggest" anything, my argument clearly states the truth. It's impossible to believe something as proof if you don't believe in what it proves. I asked you for an example to contradict this, and you failed to present one.

You think belief comes first. I think the proof does.

But it doesn't, and you can't support your argument with an example. Show me one thing that you accept as "proof" that you don't believe in the thing it proves. Just one! You must first believe whatever it is the "proof" is supposed to prove.

 

[Boss]

Great. Share them with citations that show the data. This should be fascinating.

Human history. DONE!

Where are the citations I asked for? You do know what those are, right?
Give me data, baby!
You are making claims.
You bear the burden of proof.

What? You want me to go back to the beginning of humanity and present every instance where a human has cited the power of spiritual nature's influence in their lives? I hardly think this forum could withstand the bandwidth requirement.

Oh... maybe you are talking about citations from physical science? Well, here's the problem with that... physical science deals with physical nature and spiritual nature (by definition) is not physical nature. So it's like asking to cite every instance where you've turned on the faucet and the H2O has flowed out in the form of ice cubes. This wouldn't prove there is no such thing as ice cubes. It also wouldn't prove that H2O can't take the form as a solid and can only exist as a liquid. Those might be your assumptions based on lack of citation, but it doesn't make anything a fact except your ignorance.