Howdy

[theVOID]

Good on yer ecolox. You do resemble someone accustomed to the game.

---

a theory and a little evidence to support it would be nice (and, if I may say, a rather novel concept for the current theists around here)!

Novel in that it's what atheists around here require but that Christian theists know don't apply.

And the best part is the implication of your statement; evidence isn't necessary to know absolutely what the universe is about... lol

I find your lack of reason disturbing.

[Ryft]

Hi there, ecolox. Welcome to the forums. (And thanks for your interest in my web site. Hope you get something out of it.)

[fr0d0]

And the best part is the implication of your statement; evidence isn't necessary to know absolutely what the universe is about... lol

I find your lack of reason disturbing.

So you firmly equate evidence for God with evidence for the absolute universe. Interesting and revealing. You're saying that God is not transcendent as the Christian God is defined. What is your belief Void?

[theVOID]

I accept Kent Hovind as my lord and saviour.

But seriously, i don't think any God exists because there is no good reason to believe in such an existence, the God concept is an unnecessary assumption that yields no explanatory power. It is the easy answer to the difficult questions, which is hardly surprising when you consider the origin of the beliefs.

I would much rather acknowledge the existence of possible assumptions for the unknown and say ultimately that it is unknown rather than rely on such an unproven concept as God to fill in the blanks. God is in a practical sense nothing more than a god of the gaps.

[Kyuuketsuki]

But seriously, i don't think any God exists because there is no good reason to believe in such an existence, the God concept is an unnecessary assumption that yields no explanatory power. It is the easy answer to the difficult questions, which is hardly surprising when you consider the origin of the beliefs.

Frodo , however, believes that if he defines his god as transcendent (above and beyond all normal scientific analysis) his god is no longer bound by the *rules of evidence* ... he doesn't have to prove this, he just has to define it so!

It's an insane concept otherwise referred to as NOMA

I would much rather acknowledge the existence of possible assumptions for the unknown and say ultimately that it is unknown rather than rely on such an unproven concept as God to fill in the blanks. God is in a practical sense nothing more than a god of the gaps.

Abso-fragging-lutely Captain.

Kyu

[downbeatplumb]

Howdy ecolox and welcome. Now, why are you here?

I'm here to talk about God, get attacked by atheists, and stuff like that.

Be assured, your godspeak will be attacked!

Ok then.

Have at him.

I was trying to be nice.