Anti-Christian Bigotry?

[bleeding heart]

Many Christians claim that fairies speak to them? Who knew!

Again. I'm not passing judgement. I don't argue whether or not there is a god. It's completely pointless. My only point is that those who do judge others based on their beliefs, those who judge the whole and feel superior/more intelligent, are cut from the same cloth. And it is bigotry.

But the point is - whether or not ALL of the evidence is good or not is a personal call - and it doesn't eradicate the fact that people do base their belief on evidence. It's false to claim that people's belief is not based on evidence. Don't you get that??

You're now making it about a very specific, personal claim, not simply a general belief in a god, which isn't relevant to the issue I've been arguing.

Ok....but the faery analogy WAS precisely relevant...and you somehow misread it as my saying that Christians believe in faeries. ???

[Guest American Woman]

Ok....but the faery analogy WAS precisely relevant...and you somehow misread it as my saying that Christians believe in faeries. ???

No, it wasn't relevant.

[bleeding heart]

No, it wasn't relevant.

Why not?

It's a belief in something, based on the "evidence" that they speak to me, the "small still voice in heart" as some Christians would have it.

What is the fundamental difference is the two (identical) claims of "evidence"?

[cybercoma]

I didn't say it was "special." I said it was different. AGAIN. ....whether or not there is a god is hardly comparable to "most subjects" as there is no proof one way or the other. It's an age-old question.

It's "special" because it deserves a lower burden of proof than other things. It gets "special" consideration in that sense. Why is there no proof one way or the other? You said there is evidence for a God. Is evidence not proof of God's existence?

[dre]

It's "special" because it deserves a lower burden of proof than other things. It gets "special" consideration in that sense. Why is there no proof one way or the other? You said there is evidence for a God. Is evidence not proof of God's existence?

It requires no burden of proof at all. You just have to believe what others tell you or write down.

[Mighty AC]

I didn't say it was "special." I said it was different. AGAIN. ....whether or not there is a god is hardly comparable to "most subjects" as there is no proof one way or the other.

You are correct that there is no proof, but that makes gods comparable to many other subjects. Unicorns, ghosts, leprechauns, etc. The reasonable default position is not to accept an assertion until proof exists. However, those that believe in gods do the opposite.

It would seem ridiculous to believe in unicorns and then defend that position by saying, 'prove they do not exist' wouldn't it? Yet, that's the leap theists make and then are taught that this 'faith' is a virtue.