Truth is, if there was solid evidence for the existence of God, it then would be a point of fact with no room for faith.

Therefore is it possible that the continued neutrality is being sustain by God for our benefit?

Views: 3793

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Sounds a lot like something from an Orwellian world.

@Michael - yeah, I'll play for just a little bit, but don't get used to it --

Who said, "we are justified by faith"? Your god? Is he that immature, that he has to play childish games? If so, what is there about him we should worship?

I have some tropical fish. I don't hide from them and make them guess who feeds them at night when it's dark and they can't see well. That would be absurd.

"But you didn't create them," you may well say. No, but they don't know that.

For all I know, everytime they see me coming and swarm to the side of the tank, they're saying in barely audible fish language (muffled by the water), "Gather around guys, here comes God! Yay!!"

The god in which I could believe, would not only have created the Universe, but would find time to pop down and have a cold one with me some Friday evening after work.

When that happens, I'll be the first to let you know.

pax vobiscum,
archaeopteryx
www.in-His-own-image.com

No problem. many people have no interest. But for those who like to kick it around, just putting food for thought on the table.

I don't think anyone here is that hungry - I believe it was e. e. cummings who wrote, "There is some shit I will not eat!"

pax vobiscum,
archaeopteryx
www.in-His-own-image.com

Michael,

Your premise is correct, but your conclusion is wrong.  It is true that god, if he exists, could indeed be using his powers to hide his existence much like the wizards in the Harry Potter books.  The conclusion to be drawn from that, however, is that this is one more reason to consider the god hypothesis unfalsifiable.  When a hypothesis is unfalsifiable, the burden of proof can never fall on the doubters because the negative cannot be proven--ever.  In such cases, the burden of proof falls on those who say the positive hypothesis is true.  If they can't produce even a smidgen of proof (as is the case with god), then the negative has been proven as much as it ever can be proven.  The correct logical assumption in such cases is to conclude that the hypothesized thing does not exist.

Can't argue with that, thus those who believe are greater fools, at least by using our logic. Yet this is the prophecy. 

You say, "Yet this is the prophecy," like the statement means something, but it doesn't. You are clearly a believer yourself, so did you just label yourself a fool? I'd have to agree. And you also use the term, "Our logic." I don't think your logic is the same as that used by most of the other posters here.

 "We preach Christ crucified, foolishness to the Greeks and a stumbling block to the Jews"

 

Was that supposed to be an answer? What does that mean?

@Artor, it means that Michael wants attention, and he seems to be getting it.

And then of course Michael, don't forget he has that whole myth thing going --

pax vobiscum,
archaeopteryx
www.in-His-own-image.com

Nonsense. Salvation would not necessarily be void even if faith did not exist. Your god made the rules. He could choose a different rule for salvation and not require faith (unless he's just following someone else's rules ...). 

And also, what Rocky john said. And archaeopteryx. And Aksay Bist.

RSS

  

Events

Blog Posts

Labels

Posted by Quincy Maxwell on July 20, 2014 at 9:37pm 13 Comments

Services we love

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by Dan.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service