Evidence God Exists: Part II

[Watson]

Very well, Ace. We agree to disagree. I'll take you up on that offer of tea!

Also, sorry for not using hide tags, everybody. >.< My posts are becoming very, very lengthy here.

--------------

Describe these laws.

I've got a better idea. Instead of me spending a lot of time that I don't have right now typing all of the ones I've learned out, why don't you go read the Bible and look for some of them there. I'm sure some of them will match up with lessons that you, too, have learned throughout your life. Unless you haven't learned anything at all, yet, and only think you have.

---

The experiences I am refering to, however, are not simply 'Goddidit' answers at all; they are honest observations of phenomena that I have experiened and found to be compatable with the exstence of God, if not, indicative of such a conclusion.

Blatantly obvious contradiction.

---

How so?

---

As I said, my approach is to observe humanity and honestly look at it in comparison to God and my understanding of Him; it something doesn't fit or make sense, I attempt to find a better conclusion than the one I have come to before.

That would be great if it wasn't riddled with rationalization.

---

I'm confused as to where rationalization is wrong...please explain.

---

The world I observe is what is true and honest and perceivable; it is the same one you live in. I believe in that world without any subjective proof that it exists, only trusting my senses and their ability to give me an accurate depiction of the world around me.(Although, ironically, I'm color blind.)

Your perception of the world is evidence for the view that you possess.

---

Exactly. And I do not claim it as being anything else but evidence for me.

Which are?

What did I say about the Bible?

Then he sacrificed himself

A part of himself; like amputating a limb to save the greater whole.

and went up to heaven to become himself.

'and went up to heaven to become whole again.' would be more accurate.

Buddhists aren't necessarily theists.

True. I have no contention with that. What is your point? lol

One in which you can cherry pick what you'd like to believe. Makes sense.

No, one in which I choose whether or not to believe in this, that, or the other thing. Man is not innerrant. Man wrote the Bible. Therefore, the Bible is not innerrant. I'm not cherry-picking if I'm believing only in the lessons I've learned and observed in the real world about humanity and God.

---

No, lack of belief is not a choice. Possessing belief or not, however, is.

Another obvious contradiction.

Lack of a third nipple is not a choice. Possessing a third nipple or not, however, is.


...yeah.

---

Well that's a stupid counter argument. Belief is something wholly different from a nipple. Belief can only be subjectively proven. A nipple could potentially be objectively proven.

---

This is where we differ on opinions; I believe that God is a part of you, so to claim thatyou do not believe in God is a lie to you and I; from MY point of view, at least.

This is 1 step away from dictating moral code and pushing for theistic legislation - after all, God is in everyone, and we should all obey his rules.

---

We should, but we don't all have to. That's why it's a choice.

People don't choose to not believe in something, they simply don't believe it. Also it isn't denial. It's rejection/dismissal. You say there is a god, I'm saying I don't believe you.

---

You say you don't believe me, which is a denial of belief; you are denying that you believe, I am proposing that you do.

A rejection of belief isn't a belief. Bald isn't a hair color.

---

A rejection of belief, if belief truly does exist, is a denial of that belief. I am proposing that the belief exists, and that I can use my understanding of that to predict what he may or may not do for denying what is truly there. Just like I can predict that a man who denies that a speeding truck is coming toward him, when it very definitely is, will not move out of the way.