Discounting God in two words.

[athrock]

No evidence.

Disclaimer: you're allowed to try to prove his existence.

Oh, I get it...you want examples of discounting God in two words. Let me see...off the top of my head...

"I want."
"My will."
"Gay marriage."

Each of those sets discounts the existence of God.

[Ryantology]

I'll see your two words and raise you dismissing God entirely out of hand with one word:

"So?"

That fails. 

If God really exists, then "So?" is anything but the correct response.

It's more than simply assuming a god created existence. You also assume that this god cares in the slightest what we think or do.

[athrock]

Well, if he wants to come interact with me he is quite welcome to. We can have a relationship. I'm just not interested in worship or cults.

Great! How would you go about making him feel welcome, rob? That's not a trick question.

I won't be reading that. I'm pretty sure I already listened to Steve Shives dissect it.

Why not let C.S. Lewis speak for himself and make up your own mind?

The truth of Christinaity is of no consequence to me.

Hang on. Truth is one of those things that scientists seek above all. They want to know the truth about how things work, what their relationships are, and so forth.

As someone who claims to be deeply committed to knowing what is true, how can you say that the truth found in Christianity, if there is any at all, would be "of no consequence" to you?

Wouldn't you be better for having learned a truth regardless of its source???

[athrock]

That fails. 

If God really exists, then "So?" is anything but the correct response.

It's more than simply assuming a god created existence. You also assume that this god cares in the slightest what we think or do.

I do. But first things first. If God really exists, then the next thing to do is to learn all we can about Him.

Scientists discover new things all the time. Then they study the hell out of them.

This should be right up the average atheist's alley.

[FatAndFaithless]

Erm..science isn't in the business of 'truth' proclamations. Its a method of evaluating available evidence and constructing a model that best fits that evidence at that time. There's nothing permanent or authoritarian or revealed about scientific theories, and scientists don't labor under the objective of finding any absolute truth. Its simply our best model for any given question, and its constantly changing and updating with new information.

And..scientists don't presuppose something exists and then try to find evidence for it. They draw conclusions based on where the evidence leads. Your model is most certainly NOT right up the atheist's alley.

[athrock]

If the Living God wants a relationship, I'll be waiting. But if I have to take leaps of faith and lie to myself about what makes sense to me, I doubt I'd want a relationship with him/her/it anyway.

No worries here.

God does not expect you to check your brain at the door. He gave it to you and expects you to use it.

[brewer]

Fantasy Delusion

[FatAndFaithless]

If the Living God wants a relationship, I'll be waiting. But if I have to take leaps of faith and lie to myself about what makes sense to me, I doubt I'd want a relationship with him/her/it anyway.

No worries here.

God does not expect you to check your brain at the door. He gave it to you and expects you to use it.

Alright, then he'll be fine with me not believing in him, at least until he gives me something to suggest otherwise.

[athrock]

No worries here.

God does not expect you to check your brain at the door. He gave it to you and expects you to use it.

Alright, then he'll be fine with me not believing in him, at least until he gives me something to suggest otherwise.

The error is in assuming or asserting that He has not already done so.

[FatAndFaithless]

Obviously not clearly enough, then. I'm using my brain and evaluating the world around me and see nothing that suggests a god. If he really wants me to know, maybe he should speak a little louder.