Mageth

It seems obvious to me. Once again, you first claim:

How? An act of god to prove himself to you is violating your free will to believe that god does not exist.

and then claim:

My argument is that every belief of yours is an excercise of your free will. (emphasis mine)

If it is true that "every belief of [mine] is an exercise of [my] free will", then god can't make me believe; all he can do is provide the sufficient evidence for me to believe or not believe; it would be up to me to exercise my free will and believe the evidence. God would not be violating my free will by providing sufficient evidence.

Normal

But "providing sufficient evidence" would be forcing you to believe. Notice the word "sufficient".

Mageth

[double post]

Mageth

But "providing sufficient evidence" would be forcing you to believe. Notice the word "sufficient".

No, it would not. This contradicts your statement "My argument is that every belief of yours is an excercise of your free will. "

There is sufficient evidence to believe in evolution, yet undoubtedly there are many people who do not believe in it.

Normal

You continually claim that, but I don't see how. By forcing you to believe in him, you no longer have the free will to not believe.

Normal

You are determining what is "sufficient evidence" in this case.

Mageth

But you haven't established that he would be "forcing" me to believe. Providing sufficient evidence does not force someone to believe. By your own words: "My argument is that every belief of yours is an excercise of your free will." And by the evidence such as the fact that many people do not believe in evolution, though there is certainly sufficient evidence to believe it.

DMB

Well what's so wonderful about having free will to disbelieve if you're going to get punished for it?

Normal

Sufficient evidence to the believers, which is why they believe.

Not sufficient to the unbelieves, which is why they don't believe.

Sufficient evidence forces anyone to believe who believes that evidence is sufficent.

Do you see the contradictory nature of the following sentence:

"I believe it is raining, when it is not!"

Mageth

No, I'm not. Note that I'm speaking of descent with modification from a common ancestor, not the theories of how this happens. Nature has provided us that evidence, which has been chronicled by the various scientific disciplines. There is more than sufficient evidence for anyone to recognize this as fact.

(I recommend we not go any farther on the evo argument - I merely meant this as an example of where one is not forced to believe in the face of "sufficient" evidence).