Matthew Le God

1) Your first sentence I agree with. But the burden of proof is on the person making the claim. So the rational thing to do is to withhold belief until there is evidence. 2) Your second point is a little flawed as people's beleif impact their actions and their actions impact other people and wider society. 3) 'You're not God' - what is the purpose of stating this? No, I'm not a God. Why is that relevent? You have yet to shown your assumption God exists is a valid one.

A lot of accusations there. Some you keep making without any justificaiton. So let's try to get some...! 1) Wrong about what for example? 2) Which questions have I ignored? 3) What is wrong with not being able answer a question? 4) What is wrong with answering a question with a question? Sometimes questions aren't structurally sound and require clarification through questioning 5) What reasoning of mine is flawed? 6) What have misunderstood and how should I be understanding it?

1) What reaction are you suggesting would happen? 2) Do you think every Muslim would react in the same way?

What can be claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence! Same for God, Loch Ness monster, Yetti, fairies, leprechauns, flying spaghetti monster etc etc.

You are starting from the assumption that there is creation by an entity. Why have you done that? Are you going to start using the deeply flawed watchmaker argument?

Like Hojbjerg he only has 1 year left on his contract.

It may be profit, it may be of total value. But they will get a FIFA solidarity payment for his development.

Park

Have you been tested for that cough? Six in one post sounds persistent!

Aren't jokes supposed to be funny? Which was my point with that tweet.

Turkish pretending to be itk

Sky's transfer centre have jumped the gun... https://www.skysports.com/transfer-centre

Sky's transfer centre have jumped the gun... https://www.skysports.com/transfer-centre

Bayern Munich will get a % of the Hojbjerg fee.

Like Hojbjerg, Reed's contract also expires in 2021. If we can't get £20m for Hojbjerg we won't get it for Reed.

Not sure how you worked that out. You are jumping to conclusions that the terms of the loan mean Saints can't say no.

You are going to pray(talk) to an invisible deity who you have a personal relationship with!?

I'm getting that framed regardless of context!

I've already told you that I'm happy to be shown to be wrong on this when I said... "If someone like @Raging Bull is able to provide good proof of the God he believes in then I would change my view. He hasn't come remotely close to doing so however and he seems oblivious to previous rebuttals to his claims and he uses circular arguments of using an old book to prove the claims of the same old book."

@Raging Bull Forget the Bible for a minute. Can you see why it is a problem to use a book that is not the Bible to justify the contents of the same book? For justification you need external confirmation. Now let's apply that to the Bible... you keep using the Bible to justify the contents of the Bible! You've never been able to provide external confirmation of the claims of the Bible. You always use a circular argument and that is deeply flawed.