Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (22772)	10/24/2005 10:59:22 PM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

Actually, this guy seems to have it backward... an atheist deny's the existance of god. Well, he certainly can't prove that. Nor can one 'prove gods existance', but that doesn't mean god doesn't exist. So the 'atheist' is actually the one 'asserting' and needing proof. Too funny. <Although what follows may fairly be interpreted to be a proof of the non-historicity of Jesus, it must be realized that the burden of proof does not rest upon the skeptic in this matter. As always is the case, the burden of proof weighs upon those who assert that some thing or some process exists. > This guy's funny... why would anyone care if he thought there was a god, Jesus or anything else?? There is no "burden of proof" unless you want proof!! HE want proof presumably. DAK