moiii

I agree with you,we don't have all of the answers. I appreciate and respect your questions.


"There is evidence that life today arose through billions of years of biological evolution, and no intelligent agent was necessary"

Where did it all begin? There has to be an intelligent agent at the beginning. Wouldn't a good desiner design something that could evolve and be self-sustaining?

Why do you believe the burden of proof lies on the theist?

sbaii

[QUOTE]Originally posted by moiii:
[QB]Throughout history there have been millions of men, women, and innocent children who have died in the wake of “holy” war. At the foundation of nearly every massive demonstration of evil is an unwavering “doctrinal truth” that facilitates and validates the evil that festers in the hearts of men.
==================================================
Whoa! That's a pretty strong indictment of the human race. I wonder how you manage from day to day if you feel there is evil festering away in everyone's heart. But beyond that, most religions teach the faithful to just suffer because it is some god's will, it is part of a great plan. I notice that most people, however, take advantage of medical science, once considered the work of the devil. If someone hadn't had the heretical thought that we didn't need to suffer pain, we'd still be drilling holes in our heads to let the demons out when we had a headache. I think that if you believe that AIDS is a punishment from a god, then so is every other disease and pain. SO a good believer will not avail themselves of medicines that flout the will of god. And BTW what kind of omnipotent god would be so easily flouted by an aspirin or a vaccine? Sure, there are new diseases to deal with.That's because of evolution.
In your note to me, you mention the Book of Job which is one of the truly mysterious books of the Bible. It doesn't seem to fit with the others. Do you want to believe in a god who capriciously makes a bet with evil to test a good man? And all that befalls Job is from natural causes which is considered the work of some devil. Again, the message is "suffering is life " and "don't question the ways of god". The latter message is especially troubling. If you don't question, you don't learn and nothing changes. Of course, that's what a lot of religious leaders want. They don't want anyone to question what they say or do. That's the true evil I see in the homeschooling movement. I was one of the few homeschoolers who was not fundamentalist. I get all the literature. These kids are being brainwashed into an army for Armageddon. A lot of little madrases right in our own country.

Draygomb

Moiii

by definition the first cause is that which started time and so must exist before time. It's not opinion it's definition.

likewise, Time by definition is the measure of change. No change means no time. No time means no change. If god exists without time god is unchangeable by definition.

HallaK9

moiii wrote:
As Nightshade already pointed out, the burden of proof is on the claimant. For more info about logic, check <a href="http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/logic.html" target="_blank">the logic faq.</a>

Excerp from the logic FAQ: If this wasn't the case, we'd live in world in which anything anyone claims would automatically be true until refuted. This however doesn't seem to be the case.

Oh and yes, welcome to the boards

Antti

Eudaimonist

All men by nature desire knowledge. -- Aristotle

True enough.

Praise God for the perfections of cancer and the asteroids that cross Earth's orbit.

[ February 21, 2002: Message edited by: Eudaimonia ]</p>

moiii

Whatever makes you guys sleep better. That is fine. But for the record, no one has offered one bit of factual evidence to disprove God. First he Doesn't exist because we can't see him. Then the burden of proof is on me... but no answers.hmmm.
If the burden of proof is on the claimant, then you who claim there is no God, provide proof.

moiii

phlebas

Likewise, I can point out inconsistencies in atheist doctrine.

phlebas

Feel free.

Why don't you believe in leprechauns?

JerryM

There are, I believe good arguments that the Judeo-Christian God, as described in the Bible, has attributes that are logically contradictory--i.e., omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence, etc. Just as we can say that a square circle cannot exist, if we can show that an entity has properties that conflict with each other, we can say that entity cannot exist, at least in the logical sense. One argument I find compelling concerns God's perfection. God is said to be the most perfect being of which we can conceive (this was the basis of St. Anselms's ontologic proof of God's existence.) God has perfect knowledge, perfect love, perfect justice, and perfect mercy. He lacks nothing and wants for nothing. If so, then why did he create the universe? If he wanted to share his perfect love, then he must be lonely. If he wanted us to worship and glorify him, then he must somehow lack self-esteem. In any case, it seems that he wouldn't be totally perfect. An absolutely perfect being would really have no logical reason to do anything, let alone create an entire universe. This seems to me to be a clear logical contradiction in God's presumed characteristics, and serves as an argument against any entity possessing such attributes.

Draygomb

Moiii

Inconsistencies in atheist doctrine?
What doctrine?
What inconsistencies?

by definition the first cause is that which started time and so must exist before time. It's not opinion it's definition.

likewise, Time by definition is the measure of change. No change means no time. No time means no change. If god exists without time god is unchangeable by definition.

[ February 21, 2002: Message edited by: Draygomb ]</p>