catholicray: "Bullshit depends on what you're looking for. In this case given my definition you're looking for a paradox. That's why my position is I do not believe in the non-existence of paradoxes. I don't have to provide jack squat I haven't made a claim."

“"The theist position is that a deity exists."”

“The actual Theist position however is nothing more or less than a lack of belief in the non-existence of God(s).”

“I can simply say I don’t believe God does not exist.”

YOUR CLAIMS as posted here.

“That's why my position is I do not believe in the non-existence of paradoxes.”

YOUR CLAIM as posted here.

Now who is the one full of bullshit and horse hoowhee? Like all Religious Absolutists, and their sub-species Apologists, you are so full of your own religious bullshit and holier-than-thou horse hoowhee, you CANNOT even smell the brain diarrhea you spew forth.

Special Note to MODS: The term "sub-species" above is not disparaging. It is simply stating the fact that Apologists are a sub-species of the Religious Absolutists.

THUS, until you can provide OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE because Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat, I shall forever say I do not believe your claims and you are so full of your own religious bullshit and holier-than-thou horse hoowhee, you CANNOT even smell the brain diarrhea you spew forth.

In case you need them again…

“Religious Absolutist – anyone belonging to and possessing an inexorable belief in any religion because of their inability to utilize critical thinking, logical and deductive reasoning, and rational and analytical thought, due to the Abrahamic absolutist beliefs, and is truly applicable to any inexorable religious believers, especially the worst subset, Apologists.”

“Apologist – a dastardly subset of the Religious Absolutists who practices apologetics, which is the assumption of presupposed conclusions that have nothing to do with reason and rationality and actual information and reality, creating irrational excuses and whatever conflicting ideas justifying their baseless assumptions, regardless of what the true facts are, through the use of beguiling dialectical semantics, distorted and perverted data, emotional whiney-ass pleas, due to an indoctrinational conditioning that is so ingrained they never question the veracity of the nonsense they offer, or why they need to defend their faith at all.”

The difference between a Religious Absolutist (a.k.a. – religious assholes) and a Religious Person (a.k.a. – civilized believer) is that the Absolutist completely believes the Bible/Qu'ran is inerrantly correct and will not accept any evidence that truthfully proves their beliefs are completely incorrect. A Religious Person actually believes science to be true and views the Bible/Qu'ran as basically a fairy tale, excepting the very few true truths it does hold.

Fallen @ AR: “Religion is a product of the imagination that was created to compensate for our primitive ignorance (ig•nur•uns), needing deliberate ignorance (ig•nor•uns) to survive in a reality that doesn’t need it anymore.”

“Wish in one hand (religion) and do something with the other (science). Squeeze both hands real hard and see which one comes true.” — Prince Corwin, Chronicles of Amber

Think Critically about it.

rmfr