Realm here

[theVOID]

Ahh, thankyou very much, that link was very helpful! So generous for you to give me a leg up instead of allowing me to look the fool. So you think I turn a blind eye to all of the reasons there shouldn't be a God? What reasons might those be?

This just shows you don't get the fundamental problem - regardless of any reasons to disbelieve in the existence of a deity there still remain no positive reasons for his existence (ie evidence or logical necessity), therefore assuming he does exist is irrational.

You seem to be suffering from the typical theistic indredulity, ie "I can't see how it's possible therefore wizard did it" - after this assumption you sit back and expect someone to disprove your bogus conclusion.

If you have arguments for the existence of God now would be a good time to present them.

I didn't expect it because you weren't the one who attached family aproval to the validity of their beliefs., that was Watson with his typical barrage of fallacies.

I'm not going to argue that your beliefs are invalid because someone agrees with you, as far as i'm concerned it's entirely unrelated to the truth of the proposition in question.

Well, I won't 'cherry pick', it's all or nothing,

Oh really? So you don't eat shellfish? Do you condem people who do? What about numbers 13:7-18 or numbers 21:10-24. Are you really saying that these things are just? At what point exactly did you throw your brain and moral compass into a bin?

I can't claim to understand such action or even pretend for a moment that in that day in time I would condone it, were it within my power to stop it. BUT it's in the Bible for a reason, God has standards we will never be able to reach,

Well according to you god's standards involves killing infants - that is something you would certainly be able to live up to if you genuinely thought it was a good thing.

furthermore He has all of the attributes we think we understand, but the the Nth degree. Don't ask me how I can sit here and tell you that killing innocent children is a standard I can't reach, cuz' that's not what I mean. It's hard to say for sure, but I just have faith that God is not something or Someone we can ever understand. So what parts of the Bible>? All of it. I also believe that a great deal of the Old testament serves as a catalyst for the New. Who is to say that God did not know something we didn't? All knowing remember?

So because you can't understand his reasons for doing something you are in no position to have your own opinion on the matter? Bullshit. Under what context is bashing infants to death moral?

A cheap shot at best. Don't expect retaliation here buddie I 'll just call you out if your rude.

You've already admitted you're willing to throw your moral compass out the window when it comes to anything attributed to God, so i stand by my statement.

And also, by not acting out the commandments in the bible, even though you claim it is to be taken verbaitim by order of the Wizard makes you hypocritical.

Why do I think I've a relationship with a God? (much harder to believe than a wizard, you give me too much credit) It's a very simple honest matter. I can;t use anything other than the honest truth. He guides me through life. He is there to catch me (literal sense) when I fall (metaphorical) He is there to give me gentle reminders throughout my day when I neglect to keep Him a part of it, I get those a lot these days, being in College it is easy to forget Him sometimes How do you know you have any relationships?

And this pretty much sums it all up, you are more interesting in comfort than truth.

The truth is out there and it's not beyond our reach.

Bare assettion fallacy.

Those who desire the truth more than they desire to find evidence that supports what they choose to believe in will eventually find the truth providing they never give up

WTF... I don't know where to begin other than to say this statement is riddled with stupid (try not to take too much offence).

1) this is about what we have sufficient reason to believe. Evidence for a proposition provides reason for believing in this proposition, provided that there isn't more evidence for a compeeting position - Your wizard has no evidence in his favor.

2) You've here said that you desire the truth, even though just above you made it pretty damn clear than you believe out of comfort.

3) Finding evidence that supports one's previous conclusions is a top down approach, that is theism that you have attacked, not the bottom up approach that follows the evidence to it's natural conclusion. there is no evidence at all that indicates the existence of any deity.

4) If one wants to know the truth there is no guarantee that they will eventually find it. This assumes the ultimate truth that you are so readily and foolishly attributing to a deity is possible to be known at all.

It seems to me that you are so needy for an ultimate conclusion that you have completely overlooked the fact that we at present have no rational way of arriving at one.

Firstly, what sort of alternative did you have in mind? And are you telling me, that if you had a personal experience with God, that wouldn't be enough?

Is the experience a muslim has for the existence of Allah specifically as a singular entity less valid than your experience of a trinity? Them two conclusions are contradictory, the Wizard cannot both have a son and not have a son simultaneously.

Do you think your experiences are more valid than those of anyone who disageees with you? If not then in order to determing whether or not your experiences are more legitimate you must resort to a higher standard of evience, and when you take that step and disgreard all the subjective noise there is out there you will be able to see that no such standard permits your theism.