Let's cut to the chase. Do you have any evidence?

[no evidence no belief]

I feel like we've been beating around the bush for... 6000 years!

Can you please either provide some evidence for your supernatural beliefs, or admit that you have no evidence?

If you believe there once was a talking donkey (Numbers 22) could you please provide evidence?

If you believe there once was a zombie invasion in Jerusalem (Mat 27) could you please provide evidence?

If you believe in the flying horse (Islam) could you please provide evidence?

Walking on water, virgin births, radioactive spiders who give you superpowers, turning water into wine, turning iron into gold, demons, goblins, ghosts, hobbits, elves, angels, unicorns and Santa.

Can you PLEASE provide evidence?

[Sonofason]

Son, it seems to me you're taking all your supernatural claims, plopping them into the natural category, just to give them credibility.

Surely, you can understand a difference between an intelligence which allegedly breaks the laws of physics, and non-intelligent nature which doesn't, especially when there's no evidence for the former, and all evidence for the latter.

The line between reality and fantasy isn't a fine one.

I'm sorry, but when reality is in conflict with linguistics, then linguistics must be changed.

No problem at all.

Please provide evidence for the natural (I repeat, natural) events described in the Bible (talking donkey, zombie invasions, earth stopping its orbit, great flood, talking burning bush, Nile turned into blood, walking on water, etc)

Again, I completely accept that going forward in our debate, the word to describe these events will be natural, NOT supernatural.

In fact, any linguistic definition, modification, reframing that you wish to propose, I preemtively accept.

Just provide evidence that these things happened, and address the overwhelmingly strong evidence that they did not happen.

Thank you.

When you provide me evidence that you brushed your teeth last Thursday, I will provide evidence of a talking donkey.

[Star]

Son, it seems to me you're taking all your supernatural claims, plopping them into the natural category, just to give them credibility.

Surely, you can understand a difference between an intelligence which allegedly breaks the laws of physics, and non-intelligent nature which doesn't, especially when there's no evidence for the former, and all evidence for the latter.

The line between reality and fantasy isn't a fine one.

I'm sorry, but when reality is in conflict with linguistics, then linguistics must be changed.

This makes no sense. Before we change the definition of words to suit your preference, why don't you provide us evidence that magic is natural?

[Sonofason]

Son, it seems to me you're taking all your supernatural claims, plopping them into the natural category, just to give them credibility.

Surely, you can understand a difference between an intelligence which allegedly breaks the laws of physics, and non-intelligent nature which doesn't, especially when there's no evidence for the former, and all evidence for the latter.

The line between reality and fantasy isn't a fine one.

I'm sorry, but when reality is in conflict with linguistics, then linguistics must be changed.

This makes no sense. Before we change the definition of words to suit your preference, why don't you provide us evidence that magic is natural?

Well, I'm not certain that magic is something that exists. But even if it did, I believe I'd be hard pressed to come up with any sort of evidence that would convince you that magic is real, let alone natural. I cannot show you that God exists, but I am quite certain He does. So my answer is no. I will change the definitions of the words as I choose, and I will not even try to provide evidence that magic is natural. I don't even know if it exists at all. But if it does, I assure you, it is quite natural.

[no evidence no belief]

Son, it seems to me you're taking all your supernatural claims, plopping them into the natural category, just to give them credibility.

Surely, you can understand a difference between an intelligence which allegedly breaks the laws of physics, and non-intelligent nature which doesn't, especially when there's no evidence for the former, and all evidence for the latter.

The line between reality and fantasy isn't a fine one.

I'm sorry, but when reality is in conflict with linguistics, then linguistics must be changed.

No problem at all.

Please provide evidence for the natural (I repeat, natural) events described in the Bible (talking donkey, zombie invasions, earth stopping its orbit, great flood, talking burning bush, Nile turned into blood, walking on water, etc)

Again, I completely accept that going forward in our debate, the word to describe these events will be natural, NOT supernatural.

In fact, any linguistic definition, modification, reframing that you wish to propose, I preemptively accept.

Just provide evidence that these things happened, and address the overwhelmingly strong evidence that they did not happen.

Thank you.

When you provide me evidence that you brushed your teeth last Thursday, I will provide evidence of a talking donkey.

Ah ah. The abbreviation "lol" is overused. But your post actually made me laugh out loud. Like, I was sitting in front of the screen, I read your post, laughed, my daughter sitting nearby asked me what was funny, I read her what you wrote, and she laughed too. It was a really cute moment with my daughter, and I thank you for it.

Ok, how does one answer the single most nonsensical statement ever? It's hard. Your position is so absurd that I never even conceived of having to respond to it. Let's see...

Well, as it happens, my bathroom is being renovated, so for this whole week I've been brushing my teeth in the kitchen sink. On thursday evening I went out with my wife and hired a babysitter. Because my wife is very protective, we have a nannycam in the living room, it was already turned on when I brushed my teeth, and it was placed in the living room at an angle that gives a clear shot of the kitchen. We haven't erased the nannycam footage yet. In short, I have digital high fidelity recording of myself brushing my teeth on Thursday. This video has embedded dating on it, showing that it was shot on thursday. So, I can send you by certified mail a video of me brushing my teeth, and attach my photo ID so you know it was me. If you like, I can take a DNA sample (at my expense) and submit my toothbrush for analysis at a lab of your choice, so you can verify that my DNA is on the toothbrush, a non conclusive but empirical piece of evidence that corroborates the notion that I brushed my teeth on thursday. Also, I have a receipt for the purchase of a toothbrush with my credit card made earlier that very same day. A dentist of your choice (I will foot the bill) can inspect my teeth and provide an expert opinion as to whether it looks like I've been brushing my teeth for the last week or so, and can inspect the toothbrush to assess whether the wear and tear is consistent with at least a few days of use - two non-conclusive but corroborative facts. Furthermore, I will fly to a lab of your choice (at my expense) and in front of a team of impartial observers picked by you and paid by me, I will repeat the brushing of the teeth, so that you and your team of experts can directly observe that me brushing my teeth is not physically impossible, another non-conclusive but corroborative fact. I also can submit (still at my expense) myself, my wife, my daughter and her babysitter to a polygraph test (a lie detector) and while plugged in, all 4 of us will swear that on thursday night we were all witnesses to me brushing my teeth. I can accompany that with a complete phycological analysis by a psychologist of your choice (I will foot the bill) who will be able to certify that we are all 4 of sound mind, don't use drugs, and have no propensity for hallucinations. Moreover, I can (at my own expense) hire one million people to brush their teeth in front of your very eyes, further corroborating the tangential fact that people brushing teeth is not uncommon at all. Lastly, I will give you $1,000,000 in cash for every empirical piece of evidence you can obtain that I DIDN'T brush my teeth on thursday, and $500,000 for every empirical piece of evidence that shows it's mechanically impossible for me to brush my teeth (lack of teeth, lack of hands, lack o toohbrushes or toothpaste in the area where I live, etc)

In short, I can provide the following:
- Digital video of me brushing my teeth on Thursday
- DNA evidence of me having brushed my teeth with my toothbrush
- Evidence that I purchased a toothbrush on thursday
- Medical inspection of my teeth and my toothbrush showing I brush my teeth regularly
- Direct evidence of me brushing my teeth
- Sworn testimony of four eyewitnesses, certified by polygraph and by psychoanalysis to be truthful and trustworthy, that I brushed my teeth on thursday
- Direct evidence of a million people brushing their teeth
- Complete lack of evidence AGAINST the notion that I brushed my teeth on thursday, or that I couldn't have brushed my teeth on thursday in principle.

Providing you with this will take a tremendous amount of time, energy and money, but I absolutely will do it. All I ask is that before I begin this potentially multimillion dollar operation, you just take a few moments to describe in a few words WHAT THE EVIDENCE FOR THE TALKING DONKEY IS. I'm not asking you to provide the evidence. I will do that first. I'm just asking you to briefly describe the evidence, like I did above.

Don't provide evidence, just describe it.

I'll tell you what. I know you are a busy man, so I will make even just the describing of the evidence worth your time. I estimate it will take a learned man such as yourself no more than 3 minutes to describe this evidence. I will pay you $1000 per second, for a total of $180,000. Ok?

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 1571 by no evidence no belief]

I am sorry to hear you are under the illusion you have teeth. This does not surprise me however because the teeth are part of the illusion you are real. I know this may shock you, but you are merely a character in a dream of mine. Do not fret. It could be worse. The guy you are writing, 'Sonofa...' is not even a character in the dream. He is merely a character in the dream of the character NENB who I am dreaming.

I may wake up any moment and you will all go 'poof!'

PS Don't forget to floss.

[JohnA]

Son, it seems to me you're taking all your supernatural claims, plopping them into the natural category, just to give them credibility.

Surely, you can understand a difference between an intelligence which allegedly breaks the laws of physics, and non-intelligent nature which doesn't, especially when there's no evidence for the former, and all evidence for the latter.

The line between reality and fantasy isn't a fine one.

I'm sorry, but when reality is in conflict with linguistics, then linguistics must be changed.

This makes no sense. Before we change the definition of words to suit your preference, why don't you provide us evidence that magic is natural?

Well, I'm not certain that magic is something that exists. But even if it did, I believe I'd be hard pressed to come up with any sort of evidence that would convince you that magic is real, let alone natural. I cannot show you that God exists, but I am quite certain He does. So my answer is no. I will change the definitions of the words as I choose, and I will not even try to provide evidence that magic is natural. I don't even know if it exists at all. But if it does, I assure you, it is quite natural.

State your evidence (information, facts, data) for your biblical claims then.
Make sure your evidence is able to be shown false, therefore testable/repeatable.

Good luck.

[no evidence no belief]

[Replying to post 1571 by no evidence no belief]

I am sorry to hear you are under the illusion you have teeth. This does not surprise me however because the teeth are part of the illusion you are real. I know this may shock you, but you are merely a character in a dream of mine. Do not fret. It could be worse. The guy you are writing, 'Sonofa...' is not even a character in the dream. He is merely a character in the dream of the character NENB who I am dreaming.

I may wake up any moment and you will all go 'poof!'

PS Don't forget to floss.

And then again, you yourself could be somebody else's dream. In fact you could be the dream of an entity who by sheer coincidence is almost identical to the imaginary entity called NENB which you are currently dreaming into existence. So any instant the entity dreaming you could wake up, you could go poof, I also would go poof, but the real entity which was dreaming of you dreaming me dreaming sonofason, would snap back into existence, and because he is almost identical to me, I would not perceive any cessation of existence, and my persona would seamlessly transition from being your dream onto being the persona of the real entity who was dreaming it all.

Ok, ok. enough horsing around, I simply CAN'T WAIT for sonofson to describe the evidence for the talking donkey!

[Sonofason]

Son, it seems to me you're taking all your supernatural claims, plopping them into the natural category, just to give them credibility.

Surely, you can understand a difference between an intelligence which allegedly breaks the laws of physics, and non-intelligent nature which doesn't, especially when there's no evidence for the former, and all evidence for the latter.

The line between reality and fantasy isn't a fine one.

I'm sorry, but when reality is in conflict with linguistics, then linguistics must be changed.

No problem at all.

Please provide evidence for the natural (I repeat, natural) events described in the Bible (talking donkey, zombie invasions, earth stopping its orbit, great flood, talking burning bush, Nile turned into blood, walking on water, etc)

Again, I completely accept that going forward in our debate, the word to describe these events will be natural, NOT supernatural.

In fact, any linguistic definition, modification, reframing that you wish to propose, I preemptively accept.

Just provide evidence that these things happened, and address the overwhelmingly strong evidence that they did not happen.

Thank you.

When you provide me evidence that you brushed your teeth last Thursday, I will provide evidence of a talking donkey.

Ah ah. The abbreviation "lol" is overused. But your post actually made me laugh out loud. Like, I was sitting in front of the screen, I read your post, laughed, my daughter sitting nearby asked me what was funny, I read her what you wrote, and she laughed too. It was a really cute moment with my daughter, and I thank you for it.

Ok, how does one answer the single most nonsensical statement ever? It's hard. Your position is so absurd that I never even conceived of having to respond to it. Let's see...

Well, as it happens, my bathroom is being renovated, so for this whole week I've been brushing my teeth in the kitchen sink. On thursday evening I went out with my wife and hired a babysitter. Because my wife is very protective, we have a nannycam in the living room, it was already turned on when I brushed my teeth, and it was placed in the living room at an angle that gives a clear shot of the kitchen. We haven't erased the nannycam footage yet. In short, I have digital high fidelity recording of myself brushing my teeth on Thursday. This video has embedded dating on it, showing that it was shot on thursday. So, I can send you by certified mail a video of me brushing my teeth, and attach my photo ID so you know it was me. If you like, I can take a DNA sample (at my expense) and submit my toothbrush for analysis at a lab of your choice, so you can verify that my DNA is on the toothbrush, a non conclusive but empirical piece of evidence that corroborates the notion that I brushed my teeth on thursday. Also, I have a receipt for the purchase of a toothbrush with my credit card made earlier that very same day. A dentist of your choice (I will foot the bill) can inspect my teeth and provide an expert opinion as to whether it looks like I've been brushing my teeth for the last week or so, and can inspect the toothbrush to assess whether the wear and tear is consistent with at least a few days of use - two non-conclusive but corroborative facts. Furthermore, I will fly to a lab of your choice (at my expense) and in front of a team of impartial observers picked by you and paid by me, I will repeat the brushing of the teeth, so that you and your team of experts can directly observe that me brushing my teeth is not physically impossible, another non-conclusive but corroborative fact. I also can submit (still at my expense) myself, my wife, my daughter and her babysitter to a polygraph test (a lie detector) and while plugged in, all 4 of us will swear that on thursday night we were all witnesses to me brushing my teeth. I can accompany that with a complete phycological analysis by a psychologist of your choice (I will foot the bill) who will be able to certify that we are all 4 of sound mind, don't use drugs, and have no propensity for hallucinations. Moreover, I can (at my own expense) hire one million people to brush their teeth in front of your very eyes, further corroborating the tangential fact that people brushing teeth is not uncommon at all. Lastly, I will give you $1,000,000 in cash for every empirical piece of evidence you can obtain that I DIDN'T brush my teeth on thursday, and $500,000 for every empirical piece of evidence that shows it's mechanically impossible for me to brush my teeth (lack of teeth, lack of hands, lack o toohbrushes or toothpaste in the area where I live, etc)

In short, I can provide the following:
- Digital video of me brushing my teeth on Thursday
- DNA evidence of me having brushed my teeth with my toothbrush
- Evidence that I purchased a toothbrush on thursday
- Medical inspection of my teeth and my toothbrush showing I brush my teeth regularly
- Direct evidence of me brushing my teeth
- Sworn testimony of four eyewitnesses, certified by polygraph and by psychoanalysis to be truthful and trustworthy, that I brushed my teeth on thursday
- Direct evidence of a million people brushing their teeth
- Complete lack of evidence AGAINST the notion that I brushed my teeth on thursday, or that I couldn't have brushed my teeth on thursday in principle.

Providing you with this will take a tremendous amount of time, energy and money, but I absolutely will do it. All I ask is that before I begin this potentially multimillion dollar operation, you just take a few moments to describe in a few words WHAT THE EVIDENCE FOR THE TALKING DONKEY IS. I'm not asking you to provide the evidence. I will do that first. I'm just asking you to briefly describe the evidence, like I did above.

Don't provide evidence, just describe it.

I'll tell you what. I know you are a busy man, so I will make even just the describing of the evidence worth your time. I estimate it will take a learned man such as yourself no more than 3 minutes to describe this evidence. I will pay you $1000 per second, for a total of $180,000. Ok?

Sorry, I am editing my answer here because I am quite compelled to be honest at this point in this discussion. Assuredly, it is if I was playing a game of cards. It is apparent that I was bluffing. It seems my bluff is being called, and I must lay out my hand on the table. And I am left without.

I don't know if you have evidence that you brushed your teeth. Perhaps you are bluffing. But I can see quite clearly that it is altogether possible that you do. It doesn't matter if you do. You could. It is possible. It is not however possible for me to show evidence of a talking donkey. And you know this, of course.

I cannot show evidence of a talking snake.
I cannot show evidence of a talking donkey.
I cannot show evidence of a God.
I cannot show evidence of my personal experiences of God.
I cannot show evidence that Jesus existed.
I cannot show evidence that Jesus died on a cross.
I cannot show evidence of miracles.
I cannot show evidence of a great flood.
I cannot show evidence of heaven or hell.
I cannot show evidence of angels or demons.
I have no evidence at all.

If there is no evidence of God and Christ, what exactly is the point of this debate site?

There is no objective evidence of God. So what is the point of a Christian having this debate? What is the point of an atheist engaging in this debate? Well, it's becoming my opinion, that there isn't a point in having a debate. It's a waste of my time. And it's a waste of your time. And it does neither party any good.

I'm not going to quit or anything like that. But I do believe that I will chose my arguments more wisely. Well, we'll see what happens.

Nice Job. I concede. You win.

[bernee51]

Now, as I said, "when you provide me evidence that you brushed your teeth last Thursday, I will provide evidence of a talking donkey"

While we are waiting could you please describe for me what this evidence of a talking donkey looks like.

The evidence itself is not required..just a description of same.

[no evidence no belief]

Son, it seems to me you're taking all your supernatural claims, plopping them into the natural category, just to give them credibility.

Surely, you can understand a difference between an intelligence which allegedly breaks the laws of physics, and non-intelligent nature which doesn't, especially when there's no evidence for the former, and all evidence for the latter.

The line between reality and fantasy isn't a fine one.

I'm sorry, but when reality is in conflict with linguistics, then linguistics must be changed.

No problem at all.

Please provide evidence for the natural (I repeat, natural) events described in the Bible (talking donkey, zombie invasions, earth stopping its orbit, great flood, talking burning bush, Nile turned into blood, walking on water, etc)

Again, I completely accept that going forward in our debate, the word to describe these events will be natural, NOT supernatural.

In fact, any linguistic definition, modification, reframing that you wish to propose, I preemptively accept.

Just provide evidence that these things happened, and address the overwhelmingly strong evidence that they did not happen.

Thank you.

When you provide me evidence that you brushed your teeth last Thursday, I will provide evidence of a talking donkey.

Ah ah. The abbreviation "lol" is overused. But your post actually made me laugh out loud. Like, I was sitting in front of the screen, I read your post, laughed, my daughter sitting nearby asked me what was funny, I read her what you wrote, and she laughed too. It was a really cute moment with my daughter, and I thank you for it.

Ok, how does one answer the single most nonsensical statement ever? It's hard. Your position is so absurd that I never even conceived of having to respond to it. Let's see...

Well, as it happens, my bathroom is being renovated, so for this whole week I've been brushing my teeth in the kitchen sink. On thursday evening I went out with my wife and hired a babysitter. Because my wife is very protective, we have a nannycam in the living room, it was already turned on when I brushed my teeth, and it was placed in the living room at an angle that gives a clear shot of the kitchen. We haven't erased the nannycam footage yet. In short, I have digital high fidelity recording of myself brushing my teeth on Thursday. This video has embedded dating on it, showing that it was shot on thursday. So, I can send you by certified mail a video of me brushing my teeth, and attach my photo ID so you know it was me. If you like, I can take a DNA sample (at my expense) and submit my toothbrush for analysis at a lab of your choice, so you can verify that my DNA is on the toothbrush, a non conclusive but empirical piece of evidence that corroborates the notion that I brushed my teeth on thursday. Also, I have a receipt for the purchase of a toothbrush with my credit card made earlier that very same day. A dentist of your choice (I will foot the bill) can inspect my teeth and provide an expert opinion as to whether it looks like I've been brushing my teeth for the last week or so, and can inspect the toothbrush to assess whether the wear and tear is consistent with at least a few days of use - two non-conclusive but corroborative facts. Furthermore, I will fly to a lab of your choice (at my expense) and in front of a team of impartial observers picked by you and paid by me, I will repeat the brushing of the teeth, so that you and your team of experts can directly observe that me brushing my teeth is not physically impossible, another non-conclusive but corroborative fact. I also can submit (still at my expense) myself, my wife, my daughter and her babysitter to a polygraph test (a lie detector) and while plugged in, all 4 of us will swear that on thursday night we were all witnesses to me brushing my teeth. I can accompany that with a complete phycological analysis by a psychologist of your choice (I will foot the bill) who will be able to certify that we are all 4 of sound mind, don't use drugs, and have no propensity for hallucinations. Moreover, I can (at my own expense) hire one million people to brush their teeth in front of your very eyes, further corroborating the tangential fact that people brushing teeth is not uncommon at all. Lastly, I will give you $1,000,000 in cash for every empirical piece of evidence you can obtain that I DIDN'T brush my teeth on thursday, and $500,000 for every empirical piece of evidence that shows it's mechanically impossible for me to brush my teeth (lack of teeth, lack of hands, lack o toohbrushes or toothpaste in the area where I live, etc)

In short, I can provide the following:
- Digital video of me brushing my teeth on Thursday
- DNA evidence of me having brushed my teeth with my toothbrush
- Evidence that I purchased a toothbrush on thursday
- Medical inspection of my teeth and my toothbrush showing I brush my teeth regularly
- Direct evidence of me brushing my teeth
- Sworn testimony of four eyewitnesses, certified by polygraph and by psychoanalysis to be truthful and trustworthy, that I brushed my teeth on thursday
- Direct evidence of a million people brushing their teeth
- Complete lack of evidence AGAINST the notion that I brushed my teeth on thursday, or that I couldn't have brushed my teeth on thursday in principle.

Providing you with this will take a tremendous amount of time, energy and money, but I absolutely will do it. All I ask is that before I begin this potentially multimillion dollar operation, you just take a few moments to describe in a few words WHAT THE EVIDENCE FOR THE TALKING DONKEY IS. I'm not asking you to provide the evidence. I will do that first. I'm just asking you to briefly describe the evidence, like I did above.

Don't provide evidence, just describe it.

I'll tell you what. I know you are a busy man, so I will make even just the describing of the evidence worth your time. I estimate it will take a learned man such as yourself no more than 3 minutes to describe this evidence. I will pay you $1000 per second, for a total of $180,000. Ok?

You got me. Your answer put a smile on my face as well.

Now, as I said, "when you provide me evidence that you brushed your teeth last Thursday, I will provide evidence of a talking donkey"

Sounds good. I will provide first, and then you provide second. I accept your terms 100%.

Also, I will describe the evidence I will provide first, and you will describe the evidence you will provide second.

In short, the sequence of events will be as follows:
1) I DESCRIBE (not provide) the evidence (see above)
2) You DESCRIBE (not provide) the evidence
3) I provide the evidence I described
4) You provide the evidence you described

Step 1 was done. Now it's time for step 2.

After that we will proceed to actually PROVIDING the evidence we will have just described in steps 1 and 2.

I can't stress this enough. I'm not asking you to actually provide the evidence. I am just asking you to describe what it is you will eventually provide.