(January 29, 2015 at 4:13 pm)SteveII Wrote: Sure, all these truth claims are a matter of opinion until you rise from the dead after a brutal crucifixion.
But you don't have this evidence.
All you have is some ancient texts, written decades or more after the alleged events by unknown authors, and some remarks made by non-contemporaries even later.
Quote:Whenever my atheist friends propose that unicorns, Boo the Giant Miniature Space Hamster, or whatever can be substituted for God in the philosophical arguments for God, you are missing a key point. When you tease out the premises, you see that a description of God forms.
God would have to:
1. Transcend time and space
2. To avoid infinite regression, just be metaphysically necessary
3. Omnipotent
4. Be non-physical
5. Have a mind (consciousness, purpose, etc.)
So, you cannot substitute just "anything" into the argument. That "anything" would take on all these characteristics and just be another name for God.
"God" is a job title, not a name.
But in reality, you are missing the point.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.