Do you believe in God?

[Jubby]

Children Are Constantly Being Told Santa Exists Hence why they believe in him,when they Grow Up they no longer Do .

Religion Isn't Brain Washing It's Faith .

Using this logic leads me to understand that religion is a "childish" faith. Makes sense, since as a species we don't know very much. We think we do, as children do, but when we grow up, we know better. I wonder how many centuries it'll take before we, collectively, grow up?

 

[jtv90069]

using this logic leads me to understand that religion is a "childish" faith. Makes sense, since as a species we don't know very much. We think we do, as children do, but when we grow up, we know better. I wonder how many centuries it'll take before we, collectively, grow up?

42

 

[Exorcet]

It can be tested by the intercession of the Holy Spirit, which comes through faith and a relationship with God the Father. This is a paradox concerning your proposed model - since we're now just repeating ourselves.

I've shown over and over that none of that leads to God. I've been there. I've done it. It was all me fooling myself.

I know that you've said that you're busy, but if you're getting tired of repeating yourself, why not move on to the unanswered issues which I've been presenting.

True, but there is lots of things we can't prove that we accept as rational beings. How can I prove that there is other conscious beings other than my own? How can I prove that the universe was not created 5 minuets ago with appearance to age?

In the same way it is futile to try to prove or disprove God, but the believer can believe in the existence of a transcendent creator for good reasons.

No one can prove those things, but they don't matter at all simply because they can't be proven. I don't care when the universe was made, it doesn't effect anything I do, because the model that states that it is 13 billion years old works very well and is supported by evidence. Likewise, I don't care if no one else exists. I could not very successfully live if I assumed they didn't so I must assume they do. All the evidence points to it.

As for God, there is no reason to believe. God does not solve anything or assist me day-to-day in any way, shape, or form. You also can't prove that he does or doesn't exist, so there's no point to even asking.

 

[Villain]

As Villain pointed out, there's really not much point to this because I will either accept rational reasoning and stop denying the effectiveness of the scientific method (not likely) or write it off because I have "faith" without any factual, observable, or testable basis (as I have already done).

 

[Touring Mars]

I hope for your sake, Sach, that you are never charged with a crime you didn't commit, and that those trying you have the same blithe attitude towards the value of evidence and reasoning as you... something tells me that you would suddenly develop a new respect for such things if you found yourself on the wrong side of a judgement that was unsubstantiated by any evidence - i.e. that you'd been found guilty and sentenced on the basis of a judge's personal conviction that you were guilty.

It needn't even be as dramatic as that - evidence, logic and reasoning are your only defence against all sorts of spurious claims and allegations. Why is it that most people accept the value of evidence in their day to day lives without giving it a second thought, but when it comes to asking questions regarding religious belief, evidence is practically a dirty word?

 

[Dennisch]

Why is it that most people accept the value of evidence in their day to day lives without giving it a second thought, but when it comes to asking questions regarding religious belief, evidence is practically a dirty word?

Well, that is faith.


I feel a wall O'text coming.12:10 AM

I was right.

 

[Sach]

It isn't a paradox - you're just insisting that a non-falsifiable and highly subjective alleged phenomenon can be given the same weight as objective knowledge. You don't generate a paradox by inventing a new reality!

Famine, I am only dealing with experiences from reality, and that is why I will not bend on what I have observed to be true, and attested to, by the presence of the Holy Spirit in my life.




As much as I do not wish to befoul these events, I will explain one of them now, after which time I will take a break from this thread for a while so that I can actually get some work done:



I have a friend that went on a mission trip to New Orleans, during the middle of Mardi Gras, specifically to Burbon Street. He was essentially one of the 'weirdos' standing around holding a sign with a verse on it. I don't necessarily condone this behavior from believers, but he felt called to do it. While he was there he was directed by the Holy Spirit to go and speak something very specific to a very large man that he saw partying on the street. (Unfortunately, it was a very specific phrase that I cannot remember 100% at this time, but I am trying to get a hold of my friend to confirm it. Meanwhile, I will offer what I remember this phrase to be.) My friend was in fact very uncomfortable about doing this, but he also felt very strongly that he was being directed by God, through the Holy Spirit, to go and say this specific thing to this very large man, despite the consequences.

He went up to the guy, introduced himself, at which time the guy and his friends immediately began to laugh at the situation (expectedly so - some typical Christian nutters holding signs up during Mardi Gras - again, I don't necessarily condone in most instances). My friend explained that he felt that God wanted to say something very specific to this man and so he was here to tell him. When he spoke the phrase to the guy he completely broke down upon hearing it, in the middle of Burbon Street, beads and all, and began sobbing rather intensely.

As it turns out, this man's mother was a Christian for most of her life, and if I remember correctly the phrase was something along the lines that this guy needed to "get himself straight". So again, you can imagine that my friend would not want to go and say this to a person who was rather built, and much larger than himself. Regardless, the man broke down when he heard it. The guy's mother had died only a year previous, and as I recall he said that she had always tried to get him to go to church, but he refused. She had explained Christianity to him, yet he refused (apparently he couldn't be warped at age 5...). And what she had always told him is that he needed to "get himself straight with God" before he died, which he wrote off. Now apparently this was also the last thing his mother had spoken to him as she was on her death bed about a year earlier.

My friend was given this very specific thing to say to this man, in a seemingly hostile environment, by the Holy Spirit. You say, "How can you know?" I am telling you that this is but one event that I can attest to where the validity of God's presence trumps any logic you may want to throw at it. It simply falls on its face. This is not a story that I made up. My friend cannot tell this story without coming to tears himself. He is also one of the most open and trustworthy people I have known in my life.

Was this truly a miracle? I don't know, but it was beyond the limitations of science and logic, and it did in fact happen. Whether anyone else chooses to believe it or not, is also irrelevant. I don't have to consult anyone else to confirm things that I have experienced myself. This was witnessed, by the way, by a very large group of people that were on the trip with my friend, and also happened in a crowded public place.



Which brings me back to the point of objective truth. This is my statement again: Something can be true without being objective. I understand the logic you are presenting, but the simple fact is that these things happen frequently, and are equally a part of reality. If you are never in a church, or never pray to God, never question the sin in your life, etc., then of course you likely won't experience these things. So before anyone says, "Well, I haven't experienced these things, so I go by my own experience", I will again humbly repeat, "If you knew, you would know." I can only encourage you to seek out these things if you wish to know.

Unfortunately, I am convinced that if left to one's own devices, most people will never actually put their criticisms to the test and step through the doors of a church, much less 5-10 churches if finding their path to God requires them to do so. That's one problem I have with many of these arguments. You all have done a lot of homework to gather up evidence to support the fact that you don't want to choose to believe in God, but you have done very little, if any, to research whether it is worthwhile in a spiritual sense. It involves more than intellectual criticism, I can assure you of that. I am also aware that one person here has left the church, for their own reasons. I know others who have, and faith is a sensitive thing. However, it is still up to you to find your way back to God through humility.



The truth of God exists. It is irrelevant how much logic you want to throw at me that says I can't prove it. On the terms of how science would objectively verify something, perhaps not. However, it simply is true, and I have witnessed it many times over. Examples like this put a person's faith to the test, and it holds up. Other people have witnessed it, and even more specifically, have had the validity of this confirmed by the Holy Spirit themselves. This testing and verification exists outside of the objective realm, yet it still remains true. You can spend all day saying that it is not true, but you would only be guilty of stating the same things you have accused me of doing: mere claims.



Now, I personally feel that one should not take things of this nature and put them up for befoulment in an arena such as this. Nonetheless, I have done so, and I respectfully request that if you still disagree with the nature of these events (which I believe you will), that you address them in a respectful manner.


Once again, we are all imperfect, and we can only be made differently by the allowance of the Holy Spirit.

 

[sems4arsenal]

Why do You Type like This? It's Unnecessary and Annoying.

What Is Wrong with The way I type ?

Exactly,thats an example. Im not the murdering either. Thats just what kind of culture the church cultivates. Obv. on a smaller scale at times

That Murdering Reference was a Joke .I can't really Comment on churches seeing as I am not a Christian In the First Place 👍

 

[huskeR32]

Unfortunately, I am convinced that if left to one's own devices, most people will never actually put their criticisms to the test and step through the doors of a church, much less 5-10 churches if finding their path to God requires them to do so. That's one problem I have with many of these arguments. You all have done a lot of homework to gather up evidence to support the fact that you don't want to choose to believe in God, but you have done very little, if any, to research whether it is worthwhile in a spiritual sense. It involves more than intellectual criticism, I can assure you of that. I am also aware that one person here has left the church, for their own reasons. I know others who have, and faith is a sensitive thing. However, it is still up to you to find your way back to God through humility.

From actually reading this entire thread, I've learned that many of the atheists participating, myself included, used to be Christians. It was very large part of my life for much of my childhood and adolescence in fact. Be careful with that accusation that we haven't "done a lot of homework."

 

[Dennisch]

I'm not christian, nor my parents. Yet I do have a bible in my house, and read it, because I really wanted to know what all the fuzz was about.

 

[Villain]

Once again, we are all imperfect, and we can only be made differently by the allowance of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Sach]

From actually reading this entire thread, I've learned that many of the atheists participating, myself included, used to be Christians. It was very large part of my life for much of my childhood and adolescence in fact. Be careful with that accusation that we haven't "done a lot of homework."

Let me address that by saying that my current faith is non-denominational. I feel that denominations are a creation of man which was not intended by God, or directed by Jesus. Despite that, I grew up Catholic, went to SRE, etc., but God did not truly enter my life on a larger scale until I left home, at which point I had no desire to go to church at all. I partied and 'sinned' as much as any other college freshman. It was not until around the age of 22 that I really began to examine my life, to experience conviction, and to actually turn to seeking to know God. This also happened by my own accord. My friends at this time were not Christians. The point that I am trying to make is that merely going to church out of habit does not equate to a relationship with God, and I can attest to this through my own experience because it's what I did for years.

 

[Hun200kmh]

Ok, I can't help it, I need to post here again!

Why do atheists keep asking the same question over, and over, and over, and over again?

This thread works like this:

1. Do you believe in God?


If the reply is no, the discussion ends. If the reply is yes, the second question comes.

2. Why do you believe in God?

All sorts of answers show up. I'll just write about a few that come to mind as I write and/or I remember reading from many believers:

- Personal spiritual experience;

- The yearning for absolutes we can conceive and the realization that they never can be realized in the world we know;

- the so-called "logical" reasoning about the need for a creator of all things existing;

- the existence of "laws" in this Universe (the ones that we get to know through observation and testing and being all out scientific about them) proving there's an "intelligent design" and therefore an intelligent creator;

- the complexity of it all, from the infinitely small to the unthinkable large, making some reach the same cocnlusion about said intelligent design;

- The existence of science, of abstract thought, of spirituality being themselves proof of something that escapes us, something we can definitely feel but always escapes us.

whatever else ...

If ANY of these answers show up, the atheists then ask the THIRD question (a clever one, I might add)

3. Do you have any evidence supporting the claims you're doing?

Some theists think they do. They provide the atheists a great opportunity for showing them to be wrong.

Some just say "no evidence". And stop right there. Or go one step further to say that no scientific evidence is possible.

Then they get this:

Why is it that most people accept the value of evidence in their day to day lives without giving it a second thought, but when it comes to asking questions regarding religious belief, evidence is practically a dirty word?

So, in the end, this thread is a farse, and the question isn't really a question. because from the discussion we're having here it is clear that only one outcome is possible. This:

All knowledge we have is provided by the scientific method. All knowledge we can reach is the one the scientific method will reach. Nothing exists unless and/or until the scientific method can prove its existence.

I suppose, in reality, this thread should have a different motto, or title, or even question and poll. Something like this:

Do you believe in Science as the only way possible for humans to know the truth about the origin of the Universe?


Anyway ...

I do believe God exists, I do believe that the laws of this Universe we are slowly learning through science, and - even more strongly - our own ability to learn them is just another proof of that existence. I don't believe in the chaos of a nothingness beyond what we can scientifically test, and in fact I do believe science is a way of understanding the "design" He made.

But of course ... I have ABSOLUTELY no scientific evidence of anything I just said.


Then again, my reasoning is LOGIC.

1. If God exists, He is by definition the Omnipotent Creator of everything.

2. Including Him being the Designer of how it all works.

3. By definition, he is the Creator of all the Laws we humans only discover, but then get so proud about it almost seems we CREATED them and stop asking who in fact did!

4. Therefore, if God exists, one must consider He might be beyond the capacity of human scientific knowledge.

5. Because - don't forget it - scientific knowledge is not about how the Universe works. It's how about humans may perceive it.


Of course, I have no problem with all those that believe in a Universe created from .................. but I do think they're wrong.



.................. = (insert whatever you like, but keep it in a proper scientific language. Even if it's only an unproven theory it doesn't really matter, as long as you keep it safe from a Creator, you can pick anything from "nothing" to "everything" (make sure you mean a "thing" in any case).

 

[Dennisch]

And I think you are wrong.



I love the internet.

 

[Famine]

Do you believe in Science...

Nonsensical. Though some people probably do.

Faith and belief are both utterly denied by objective proof. Objective proof destroys faith and belief because there is no need to refer to feelings in that which can be objectively proven. If you have objective proof that [n] exists, you cannot have either faith or belief in it.

 

[Hun200kmh]

Nonsensical. Though some people probably do.

Sorry but either it is my English again playing tricks on me or indeed there's nothing nonsensical in that question.

But let me rephrase it:


Do you believe the method to obtain objective proof is the only way possible for humans to know the truth about the origin of the Universe?

Is that better? If it isn't, and unless my point is totally unclear, please do edit the question in the way you feel it translates correctly the question I mean.

 

[CodeRedR51]

From actually reading this entire thread, I've learned that many of the atheists participating, myself included, used to be Christians.

Guilty.

Although I've hardly participated.

 

[Exorcet]

Let me address that by saying that my current faith is non-denominational. I feel that denominations are a creation of man which was not intended by God, or directed by Jesus. Despite that, I grew up Catholic, went to SRE, etc., but God did not truly enter my life on a larger scale until I left home, at which point I had no desire to go to church at all. I partied and 'sinned' as much as any other college freshman. It was not until around the age of 22 that I really began to examine my life, to experience conviction, and to actually turn to seeking to know God. This also happened by my own accord. My friends at this time were not Christians. The point that I am trying to make is that merely going to church out of habit does not equate to a relationship with God, and I can attest to this through my own experience because it's what I did for years.

If that's in reference to me, I did not go out of habit. If I could go back in time and bring one of my former selves here, that former self might have been offended by such a comment. I believed in God. I knew he was real. It couldn't be any other way. I would separate myself from anything that even suggested that God was less than infinitely important. I never took God/Jesus' name in vain, even if my Christian friends did. I once questioned a teacher when she stated something that in my mind suggested that God's power was less than limitless. I took disbelief at people who engaged in small talk while at mass. I did the same when people did not dress properly or when they left as soon as the closing hymn started to play. I also lived with the fear that God's plan for me might be something that I did not want to do, but I told myself that I would have to do it because it would be best. I'm very glad that I never decided that God called me. I could have wasted my entire life. The effects from that wouldn't have been limited to me either. It could have had serious negative effects on everyone I cared about.

After that phase, the thinking starting, and the belief fell to nothing in the face of reason.

As for your friend's story, there's a lack of detail which leaves a lot of room for alternate explanations. I'm most interested in knowing if this was the only time he heard the voice and tried talking to someone like that. If it wasn't the only time, I wonder what his "success rate" was.

 

[Famine]

Sorry but either it is my English again playing tricks on me or indeed there's nothing nonsensical in that question.

But let me rephrase it:


Do you believe the method to obtain objective proof is the only way possible for humans to know the truth about the origin of the Universe?

That better?

Not really, no. So long as you're using the word "belief" or "believe" to describe the act of accepting that which has been objectively proven, the sentence will not make sense.

 

[Sach]

If that's in reference to me, I did not go out of habit. If I could go back in time and bring one of my former selves here, that former self might have been offended by such a comment. I believed in God. I knew he was real. It couldn't be any other way. I would separate myself from anything that even suggested that God was less than infinitely important. I never took God/Jesus' name in vain, even if my Christian friends did. I once questioned a teacher when she stated something that in my mind suggested that God's power was less than limitless. I took disbelief at people who engaged in small talk while at mass. I did the same when people did not dress properly or when they left as soon as the closing hymn started to play. I also lived with the fear that God's plan for me might be something that I did not want to do, but I told myself that I would have to do it because it would be best. I'm very glad that I never decided that God called me. I could have wasted my entire life. The effects from that wouldn't have been limited to me either. It could have had serious negative effects on everyone I cared about.

After that phase, the thinking starting, and the belief fell to nothing in the face of reason.

Interesting to know, and thank you for sharing. Though I have had many beneficial and revelational experiences in church, I am actually against much modern church culture/society. I do not wish to offend you, but if I am being completely honest, what you have described sounds like a belief that was shadowed by the fears resulting from legalism. You questioned people's behavior quite often, for what reason? Is it a sin to leave as a hymn is playing? I would argue that it is not, for example. Mostly I would have concern with your fear that God would call you to something that you do not want to do. I simply don't believe that God would call you to a life of misery. I can't prove these things, but that is the view from my own experiences with 'church'.


The existence of God (specifically, the Christian god), and 'Church' are a wholly other can of worms in itself. Not that we didn't already know that.

 

[huskeR32]

Let me address that by saying that my current faith is non-denominational. I feel that denominations are a creation of man which was not intended by God, or directed by Jesus. Despite that, I grew up Catholic, went to SRE, etc., but God did not truly enter my life on a larger scale until I left home, at which point I had no desire to go to church at all. I partied and 'sinned' as much as any other college freshman. It was not until around the age of 22 that I really began to examine my life, to experience conviction, and to actually turn to seeking to know God. This also happened by my own accord. My friends at this time were not Christians. The point that I am trying to make is that merely going to church out of habit does not equate to a relationship with God, and I can attest to this through my own experience because it's what I did for years.

Since you want to make this about the semantics of my use of the word "Christianity," I'm going to make it about the semantics of the part in bold.

Church was never that important to me. I did, however, have what I felt was a real, undeniable relationship with a divine being. It was more than the "habit" you'd like to dismiss it as. I sought god, I yearned to know him, to grow closer to him, and all the rest.

The point is, don't dismiss my present disbelief on the grounds that I never tried to know god in the first place. You're dead wrong.

 

[Hun200kmh]

But, Famine, I'm not using the word "believe" to the act of accepting something objectively proven, I'm precisely using the word "believe" in regard to something that cannot be objectively proven. Because it is about a path to be made, therefore unproven, at least until you get to that ultimate objective (proof).

 

[Sach]

The point is, don't dismiss my present disbelief on the grounds that I never tried to know god in the first place. You're dead wrong.

I understand. Please be aware that I am not, nor have I, accused you specifically of these things. I simply made a statement, but it was not directed at you personally.

I would be curious to know what happened to cause you to leave your faith. Was it a particular event, or a gradual thing?

 

[huskeR32]

I understand. Please be aware that I am not, nor have I, accused you specifically of these things. I simply made a statement, but it was not directed at you personally.

I would be curious to know what happened to cause you to leave your faith. Was it a particular event, or a gradual thing?

A very gradual process. And honestly a very difficult one. I didn't want to let go of my faith.

I can't really point to one instance or event that caused it. Just something I discovered myself doing as I matured (not that people who believe aren't mature.)

 

[Jubby]

A very gradual process. And honestly a very difficult one. I didn't want to let go of my faith.

I can't really point to one instance or event that caused it. Just something I discovered myself doing as I matured (not that people who believe aren't mature.)

@Everyone: Similar here as huskeR explained... except, I feel like "He/She/It" exists. Call him/her/it God if you want, it's a name. I imagine he's a deity, but there are many. Not "Gods" in the sense, but different planes of existence. Beings with power and understanding we can only imagine and not explain. I often wonder if the illogical randomness of particle 'memory' (as an example) has something to do with those on the different planes. I just lost the belief that He's It. The God that is supposed to be "The One" is just an idea among many. Does it make sense that there is just one of him, or many of them?

 

[Bobalob]

Hey we've managed to forget about all the other nutters and just focus on Christianity.

Those are the bestest ones

 

[niky]

@Sach: As said: spiritual events are not proof of a specific something. Only an indicator that something, something not fully understood, is happening.

Why do children dream about dead grandparents, even when they don't know they're dead or don't seem to understand that they've died? Why did some passengers on the Titanic, some hundred-odd years ago, not get on the maiden cruise, due to some dream they've had of the ship sinking?

There are things your brain tells you, things that don't seem to have a logical source or explanation, but which may become clear on further study. The power of suggestion and the subconscious can be fairly pervasive... as many "mentalists" will attest to. I've seen cultists speak in tongues or have fits resembling demonic possession... all on the power of suggestion. Religion is not just an idea, it's a language and a culture. And sharing that language enables you to connect on a level that is not readily apparent, but which is there.

This is not to deride your friend or his desire to do good deeds, which I find commendable.

True, but there is lots of things we can't prove that we accept as rational beings. How can I prove that there is other conscious beings other than my own? How can I prove that the universe was not created 5 minuets ago with appearance to age?

Because you were conscious of things happening more than five minutes prior to this post?

As said before: If it has the appearance of reality, if it has the consistency of reality and if it has the persistence of reality, then that is reality.

-

Q: How do you make a bed seem like someone has slept in it?

A: Sleep in it.

But, Famine, I'm not using the word "believe" to the act of accepting something objectively proven, I'm precisely using the word "believe" in regard to something that cannot be objectively proven. Because it is about a path to be made, therefore unproven, at least until you get to that ultimate objective (proof).

Do you believe in the existence of your mother? If you can answer why that makes no sense, you've gotten Famine's point.

You don't have to believe in science. Science is merely the description of adequate proof. Once you have adequate proof to support an argument, bam, that's science!

You can no more "believe in Science" than you can "believe in Math" or "believe in Language". You're simply coming up with that question as an excuse to attack the findings of science which don't correspond to your own belief system.

 

[homeforsummer]

You could do so vainly, you have free will to. Many years ago people attributed the rising and setting of the sun to misplaced sources as well.

Only the rising and setting of the sun can be validated. God cannot.

Thus my lack of experience of God and subsequent lack of belief in him holds exactly the same weight - no greater, but no less either - than your belief in him.

I have no evidence to support that claim, but then nor do you.

How can I prove that the universe was not created 5 minuets ago with appearance to age?

Time is relative, though malleable with gravity. We all experience time at a broadly similar rate (time's fluctuation according to gravity means that people on the International Space Station are actually experiencing slightly quicker time than we are - so, technically, is someone on the storey above you in your house/school/whatever) so any philosophical discussion about the nature of time is largely irrelevant - we place an arbitrary unit on time which tells us, for example, that our planet is 4.5 billion years old. Since nobody we can talk to is experiencing that time at a different rate, our arbitrary unit system is the only one that matters.

While the unit is arbitrary, the measurement itself isn't. Based on subdivisions of that 4.5 billion year unit we can use radio carbon-dating to determine the decay of ancient elements, and that is our evidence that our earth is the age it is. The red-shift of light from distant galaxies is our evidence that the observable universe is the size and age it is.

We could entirely re-classify how we measure time and say that the universe really is 5 minutes old - but then we'd only have to create more sub-divisions to give us reasonable time frames like days, hours and whatever replaces minutes.

But you can't prove that the universe is only 5 minutes old through scientific method, because we already know that isn't the case.

 

[Denur]

I have a friend that went on a mission trip to New Orleans, during the middle of Mardi Gras, specifically to Burbon Street. ........

Thank you for sharing this Sach. I can understand how an event like this had a major impact on all those who witnessed this, but I have a different explanation of why your friend said that phrase and why that guy got so emotional.

Fist of all, I have heard that sentence "Get straight with God" a number of times on TV recently. I don't remember specifically in which programs (possibly the documentary series "Inside"), but the fact that I'm familiar with that phrase is an indication to me that it is rather commonly used within the Christian community.

This guy had only recently lost his mother and he may have felt some guild for going to Mardi Grass and party. And when he noticed your friend's group and their signs, he was reminded even more of his dead mother. His mother who always had tried to get him to believe in God and even did so on her deathbed. At the very moment your friend approached him, the guy could have remembered just then that sentence.

Your friend meanwhile, had been trying to get the courage to approach this big man and I can understand that he would use prayer to achieve that: "Please God give me strength; What should I say, what to say???". And when your friend was right in front of this man, he blurted out, maybe almost in a trance, the fist thing that came to mind: "Get straight with God". I wouldn't be surprised if your friend had been using that sentence all day, or that it was even on one of the signs.

Hearing at that very moment the sentence his mother had used, was enough to bring even this big man down. Did he proclaim that he, from now on, would believe in God, or was he merely stricken with grieve and sorrow over his dead mom?

Please don't take offense that to me the whole story sounds like a simple coincidence.

 

[CraftyLandShark]

I've shown over and over that none of that leads to God. I've been there. I've done it. It was all me fooling myself.

I know that you've said that you're busy, but if you're getting tired of repeating yourself, why not move on to the unanswered issues which I've been presenting.

Again, I agree.

Sach: Apparently I, specifically, frustrated you enough to be "personally done with me". If you took offense, be assured none was intended, but you have to understand that when multiple people challenge parts of your case, and you reply just by restating your claims, some people get testy.

I've had what seems to be a very similar experience with religion to Exorcet. I spent a very long time trying to fool myself into believing, as earnestly as possible.

I had, what from the eyes of most devout (American) Christians, was a strong compulsion to do so.

I'm gay. I spent my entire childhood trying various methods of "cleansing myself" of something that most people around me seemed to consider vile. I dealt with that on my own terms, and am completely happy with where I am in my life.

That still doesn't completely wash away the bitter taste in my mouth regarding faith, however, so yes, it can make me testy. It can do the same to others who have similar experiences. I often decide against sharing this facet of myself in discussions such as these so as to avoid bias, but I feel that sharing it is useful at this point.

Bear in mind, I am fully aware that not all Christians take every bit of scripture literally in that regard, and am fast friends with many such people. I fully grasp the differences between faith and church, and while I may have some lingering resentment, in honest retrospect, I doubted the existence of God before I knew what 'gay' meant.

What I still don't grasp, though, is why you want to label our position as a completely diametrically opposed system.

This doesn't have to be a "Science vs. God" discussion, despite how often many of us let it become so.

There are many fields of human exercise that aren't scientific, yet aren't dismissed as invalid by scientists. Art, music, literature, cultural studies, hell, even sports - none of these things are exactly scientific notions, yet most atheists have no problem with them, and probably rather enjoy them. They are not scientific, but there's no doubt that they have validity within the scope of human experience.

Our problem is with unsubstantiated and untenable assertions of knowledge regarding a topic that allows the one making the claim to, whether he admits it or not, treat his own moral code as exclusively correct regardless of the nature of that code when tested by objective reality. Like it or not, those are the logical implications of believing in a God who (a) exists as an entity; (b) claims exclusive truth; and (c) lays out a set of moral laws for which the punishment/reward scheme is eternal, unwavering and brutal to those who fail to live up to it, or more correctly to those who fail to take the "Get Out of Jail Free" card offered to those (all of humanity) who fail to live up to it. You clearly embrace "a". You accept "b", as well, given past statements, but you seem to want to try to wriggle out of fully embracing "c", by pointing out that you, as a human, are "fallen", and don't live up to the standards set by your God, but you don't seem to shy away from certitude in most circumstances.

You tend to use your faith to make such sweeping statements as "If you knew, you'd know", "That's not how it works", and you label science as "painfully limited", if I remember correctly.

When you make such specific assertions that presuppose knowledge that, given your context, you treat as "closed topics", the language that the response must generally take is science, which deals in specific analysis of specific claims.

That does not, mean, however, that the only cases for atheism are strictly and rigorously scientific. The door has been held open to move into these venues several times by several people. If you tire of repetition, please, let's step through that door.