what would be an actually good reason to believe in a god.

[Baruch]

Are you inferring that your personal definition of omniscience, "all knowing", is simply knowing in its rawest form?

All Knowing ... otherwise uncertainty remains.  There is no such thing as raw data, even involuntarily, your retinas and optic nerves interprets your eyesight (a gestalt), before it gets to be processed by your cognitive functions.  The closest thing we ever got to, to uninterpreted experience, was your first day as an infant after birth.  From there on, we are in the Matrix (which word roots to "mother").

[Sorginak]

All Knowing ... otherwise uncertainty remains.  There is no such thing as raw data, even involuntarily, your retinas and optic nerves interprets your eyesight (a gestalt), before it gets to be processed by your cognitive functions.  The closest thing we ever got to, to uninterpreted experience, was your first day as an infant after birth.  From there on, we are in the Matrix (which word roots to "mother").

*Hands you a tinfoil hat*

[fencerider]

Mike "lack of evidence of god should constitute proof that god does not exist"

there is no proof of god => god does not exist - incomplete argument

I wish it was that easy Mike, but it's not. Before you draw that line you have to prove that no one; including god; destroyed evidence. You also have to prove that there is no evidence. There may or may not be evidence on the other side of the universe. Unfortunately according to what NASA says to the public, it is beyond our ability to go to the otherside of the universe. We can not conclusively say that there is no evidence until we have the ability to search every part of the universe.


I would still like to know why the Christian god who has a love/hate relationship with humans is so afraid to show his face...

[Baruch]

*Hands you a tinfoil hat*

No, the visual cortex is what it is ... study that ... as a model of all sensation and brain function (it is our most powerful sense).  Discursive notions ... are absolutely inferior to a knowledge of even how part of the brain works.  You can't know if you have arrived at your destination, if you have no map.

[Sorginak]

No, the visual cortex is what it is ... study that ... as a model of all sensation and brain function (it is our most powerful sense).  Discursive notions ... are absolutely inferior to a knowledge of even how part of the brain works.  You can't know if you have arrived at your destination, if you have no map.

I am quite aware of how the eye works.  However, you are confusing our understanding of the eye with obtuse sensationalism. 

[Baruch]

I am quite aware of how the eye works.  However, you are confusing our understanding of the eye with obtuse sensationalism.

I can touch the corner of a triangle, whose angle is greater than 90 degrees?  Or am I being obtuse ;-)

[Blackleaf]

Mike "lack of evidence of god should constitute proof that god does not exist"

There is no proof of god => god does not exist - incomplete argument

I wish it was that easy Mike, but it's not. Before you draw that line you have to prove that no one ; including god; destroyed evidence. You also have to prove that there is no evidence. There may or may not be evidence on the other side of the universe. Unfortunately according to what NASA says to the public, it is beyond our ability to go to the otherside of the universe. We can not conclusively say that there is no evidence until we have the ability to search every part of the universe.


I would still like to know why the Christian god who has a love/hate relationship with humans is so afraid to show his face...

It's all the iron. He's scared to death of that stuff.

[Baruch]

It's all the iron. He's scared to death of that stuff.

Holy Kryptonite, Blackleaf - Jimmy Olson

[Mike Cl]

Mike "lack of evidence of god should constitute proof that god does not exist"

there is no proof of god => god does not exist - incomplete argument

I wish it was that easy Mike, but it's not. Before you draw that line you have to prove that no one; including god; destroyed evidence. You also have to prove that there is no evidence. There may or may not be evidence on the other side of the universe. Unfortunately according to what NASA says to the public, it is beyond our ability to go to the otherside of the universe. We can not conclusively say that there is no evidence until we have the ability to search every part of the universe.


I would still like to know why the Christian god who has a love/hate relationship with humans is so afraid to show his face...

So, then, we cannot prove the Tooth Fairy does not exist?  Nor Fairies? 

[Cavebear]

Universally accepted evidence of stated deity's existence is the only reason to believe in that god's existence.

And if the evidence is not accepted universally?

[Baruch]

And if the evidence is not accepted universally?

So Trump isn't the anti-Christ as long as at least one person disagrees?

[Mike Cl]

So Trump isn't the anti-Christ as long as at least one person disagrees?

Trump cannot be the anti-christ, since christ is a fiction.  That would be like saying he was the anti--Tooth Fairy.  But to say he is evil is accurate.

[fencerider]

So, then, we cannot prove the Tooth Fairy does not exist?  Nor Fairies? 

I dont know. Maybe one day we will find out that the Bible was written by fairies, and the giants it talks about are us.

[Mike Cl]

I dont know. Maybe one day we will find out that the Bible was written by fairies, and the giants it talks about are us.

That's my point--some day we 'may' find out.  But until that time, for me, the total and complete lack of evidence just screams fiction--a Creator God who leaves no traces whatsoever, is and must be, a fiction.  When/if the day comes when proof suddenly appears, I will then change my way of thinking and embrace this God for all I'm worth.  But until that day (and even saying that is telling the theist we have doubt in our thoughts--and I don't.  And I don't doubt that the Tooth Fairy is not real as well.) I will keep thinking god is simply a fiction and a scam.

[Unbeliever]

Mike "lack of evidence of god should constitute proof that god does not exist"

there is no proof of god => god does not exist - incomplete argument

I wish it was that easy Mike, but it's not. Before you draw that line you have to prove that no one; including god; destroyed evidence. You also have to prove that there is no evidence. There may or may not be evidence on the other side of the universe. Unfortunately according to what NASA says to the public, it is beyond our ability to go to the otherside of the universe. We can not conclusively say that there is no evidence until we have the ability to search every part of the universe.


I would still like to know why the Christian god who has a love/hate relationship with humans is so afraid to show his face...

But there is logical evidence against logically inconsistent [G]ods. If a God with mutually exclusive characteristics is posited, then logic denies its existence.