It almost seems like atheists don't want to believe in God. Do you just simply not want to believe in God because you don't want to give up your own free will?
ADMIN EDIT: Mercedes has left ThinkAtheist.com on her own accord. This discussion will remain, however do not expect a response from the author.
That's not an insult - I'm just expressing how sorry I feel for you. I know that doesn't make sense to you, but nothing we say does so you should be used to it by now.
People are getting frustrated with you because you're not playing by the rules of a fair debate. You're throwing out fallacies left and right, and you're trying to win instead of learn. Don't think for a second you have a right to act mightier than thou when people start to get fed up with that kind of childish behavior.
I like how you changed the post I had responded to. I will say, for now, that I do not easily reject anything. I've put a lot of thought into my opinion. An entire life's worth of very serious meditation. And after careful deliberation, I'm reporting that that feeling you get that God is real is NOT universal.
No. I'm saying that it seems to me like you easily reject the evidence that DOES exist on his existence.
I reject what you provide because it is not evidence and it does not prove God exists.
Nobody here is rejecting evidence for God's (or any other deity's/supernatural being's for that matter) existence. The bar is quite low - ANY evidence for such. The "high bar" of which you speak is "evidence". The defining characteristic of evidence is that it can be objectively measured and that measurement can be replicated - it's testable. And according to the Bible narrative, God's existence was actually subjected to a test (remember that story about the priests of Baal(?) and the prophet of God?) and he/she/it/they revealed their power and directly consumed an offered sacrifice. No, even according to the Bible, God is not immune to testing. But the Bible itself is not evidence of God or any of it's other narratives of history - those require physical evidence. And that evidence has been examined and found wanting.
What makes you think we've "easily" rejected the so-called evidence for his existence? Why don't you, instead, ask what we actually went through? I was a Christian for 24 years, and my grandfathers were preachers. I grew up in the church. I believed it all hook, line, and sinker. I didn't "easily" reject anything. It was a long, painful process... that was completely unintended. I was being honest. It had nothing to do with NOT WANTING to believe there was a god. I wanted to believe. I did. But, after laborious research, and emotional strife, I discovered everything I'd been told was a lie.
What I want to believe, Mercedes, is the truth. And if the Bible doesn't hold up to critical examination, it's not true. It's a fable.
the evidence that DOES exist on his existence.
Please, provide it. We will address each piece of evidence with a solid reason why we reject it.
If God were fake we wouldn't have the Bible. That is proof. So is Jesus. His covenant resolved the others so all we need to do is believe in him.
All the writings of J. K. Rowling point to the existence of Harry Potter as much as all the unknown long dead authors, editors, and annotators of the various bibles point to the existence of supernatural beings. Same thing.
That's a really stupid comparison. I don't see how you equate Harry Potter with the Bible.
You seem so stuck on the bible. What about the tens of dozens of other holy books, some much older than the bible and most which are alot more internally consistent. Do they prove that that vishnu ,krishna, allah and the tao exist?