So you have no valid logical reason to believe in God... I thought as much.

Now for another set of questions:

1) Why does God require that there is no evidence, empirical or logical, for his existence?

2) How do you know that (1) is true?

"faith is the abandonment of logic and reason and the subjugation of ones mind and true self "

Utterly ridiculus. Faith is belief without evidence. Clearly atheists don't allow for intangible evidence like intuition, spirit, visions, miracles or historically unfounded documents. They allow for mathmatical proofs of scientific theories though. Clearly the type of evidence required is variable and in my opinion should be relative to the subject of proof. I use historical evidence to support history, math for mathmatics, etc. Atheists simply won't except spiritual evidence for proof of spirituality. If Faith is belief without evidence and I'm a materialist then you could never convince me Math proved anything. I still wouldn't assert that Faith in Mathmatics is the abandonment of logic and reason. Preposterous. And as far as "the subjugation of ones mind and true self "... perhaps your biased hatred of your previous beliefs is clouding you opinion a bit? Perhaps that's subjugation of your true self.. I'm not commenting any more on that.

VOID- Could you define the type of reasoning and evidence required for substantiation?

Do you not see the inanity of your position? There is no logical reason to believe in a god when you know full well that the very idea of god or gods is a product of mans own mind.

(January 26, 2010 at 2:23 pm)tackattack Wrote: "faith is the abandonment of logic and reason and the subjugation of ones mind and true self "

Utterly ridiculus. Faith is belief without evidence. Clearly atheists don't allow for intangible evidence like intuition, spirit, visions, miracles or historically unfounded documents. They allow for mathmatical proofs of scientific theories though. Clearly the type of evidence required is variable and in my opinion should be relative to the subject of proof.

Intuition is a real phenomenon based upon assertions that one feels or an incomplete model that one has built up by any means necessary. Sometimes it is right, sometimes it is wrong. Critical thought is right in point out how unreliable intuition is - it isn't just "Atheists".

Like self produced manias and highs, visions are just as suspect as the ones induced through drugs. Historically unfounded documents exist in bargain bookstores, with names like Twilight. After all, it takes place in a historical time (modern day) and is unfounded because it is fiction.

The rest of your post, I will leave to someone else. There are simply too many ridiculous statements for me to confront, but I can call you out on drawing a link between fiction and mathematical proofs.

"Utterly ridiculous. Faith is belief without evidence."

tackattack, You don't see anything wrong with your above statement, seriously? I do not consider my "hatred" for religious belief as biased since I don't hate religious belief. I simply have a hard time understanding how someone who is shown plainly how superficial those beliefs are cling so tenaciously to a lie. My argument is based on the history of religion itself and not only on objective or subjective evidence and research. Mankind has always worshiped something, or someone, at one time or another. Some people will attribute this to a yet to be proven "god gene" or some other nonsense, but history has shown that religion grew out of mans fears and ignorance of the world he lived.

Most of our oldest religions were the worship of nature itself this included, earth, trees, animals, the sky, the stars, etc. later we gave these very natural things names and personalities (polytheism), then we decided to put all of these gods together and make him one god (monotheism). We have worshipped animals, idols made by our own hands, rocks, and even other men. The history of religion itself attest to it's very mundane and human origins.

I know no such thing and no I don't see the insanity. I do however see the logic in believing in something I have evidence for. Your stadards of non-subjective tangible evidences of insubstntial ideals seem inappropriate and not relative to the proof. I do see that much of man's idea of God is a product of man's hopes and aspirations. But when all human traits are stripped away, my idea of God is still there.

(January 26, 2010 at 2:32 pm)chatpilot Wrote: There is no logical reason to believe in a god when you know full well that the very idea of god or gods is a product of mans own mind.

Keep saying that enough and maybe even you will believe it.

You come up with such broad sweeping statments like this, CP, that are totally unsupported. How in the world do you know that Tackattack or anyone else know this. I certainly do not know this nor do I think that your statement is accurate.

rjh4 just research the history of religion and do some comparative religious studies and come back to me later. I don't think it will help you since faith is stronger than common sense but it is worth a try.

(January 26, 2010 at 2:42 pm)Synackaon Wrote:

---

(January 26, 2010 at 2:23 pm)tackattack Wrote: "faith is the abandonment of logic and reason and the subjugation of ones mind and true self "

Utterly ridiculus. Faith is belief without evidence. Clearly atheists don't allow for intangible evidence like intuition, spirit, visions, miracles or historically unfounded documents. They allow for mathmatical proofs of scientific theories though. Clearly the type of evidence required is variable and in my opinion should be relative to the subject of proof.

Intuition is a real phenomenon based upon assertions that one feels or an incomplete model that one has built up by any means necessary. Sometimes it is right, sometimes it is wrong. Critical thought is right in point out how unreliable intuition is - it isn't just "Atheists".

Like self produced manias and highs, visions are just as suspect as the ones induced through drugs. Historically unfounded documents exist in bargain bookstores, with names like Twilight. After all, it takes place in a historical time (modern day) and is unfounded because it is fiction.

The rest of your post, I will leave to someone else. There are simply too many ridiculous statements for me to confront, but I can call you out on drawing a link between fiction and mathematical proofs.

---

OK then Syn, How is your faith in mathmatical formulae different from my faith in existance in God then, please?

(January 26, 2010 at 2:32 pm)chatpilot Wrote:

---

Do you not see the inanity of your position? There is no logical reason to believe in a god when you know full well that the very idea of god or gods is a product of mans own mind.

(January 26, 2010 at 2:43 pm)chatpilot Wrote: "Utterly ridiculous. Faith is belief without evidence."

tackattack, You don't see anything wrong with your above statement, seriously? I do not consider my "hatred" for religious belief as biased since I don't hate religious belief. I simply have a hard time understanding how someone who is shown plainly how superficial those beliefs are cling so tenaciously to a lie. My argument is based on the history of religion itself and not only on objective or subjective evidence and research. Mankind has always worshiped something, or someone, at one time or another. Some people will attribute this to a yet to be proven "god gene" or some other nonsense, but history has shown that religion grew out of mans fears and ignorance of the world he lived.

Most of our oldest religions were the worship of nature itself this included, earth, trees, animals, the sky, the stars, etc. later we gave these very natural things names and personalities (polytheism), then we decided to put all of these gods together and make him one god (monotheism). We have worshipped animals, idols made by our own hands, rocks, and even other men. The history of religion itself attest to it's very mundane and human origins.

---