Are you sure God does not exist?

[Sandra Craft]

The Blind men/Elephant story fits the same mold as using special pleading. It's like touching the elephant and the conversation goes like this:

BM1: Yep, I touched the "elephant". But it wasn't an elephant. It was a tree.

BM2: Nope, it was a rhinoceros.

BM3: Nope. I agree with BM1 and say it's a tree. And I'll go one step further to say it's a Cypress tree.  [etc]

That's not exactly the version I heard.  In mine one man touched the leg and thought an elephant was like a tree, the other touched the trunk and thought it was like a rope and the third touched the ear and thought it was like a fan.  They were all right, but they were also all wrong, because all their information was incomplete. 

I know this because I have faith and it more valued by  blah, blah, blah." And that takes us to

...is that faith is the greater discipline, the greater test, and is therefore more valued by god in its teacher function. What better way to describe special pleading?

I was trying to demonstrate how each could be viewed as equally difficult, but OK.

Even Sagan's definition of God as the sum total of the universe is special pleading. After all, the universe is defined as its own sum total. To call the universe God doesn't define the universe, but only renames the universe...and the universe already has a name.  Damn, saying that just made me dizzy... *chucklin*

It wasn't Sagan's personal definition of god, just one of those he gave to demonstrate the lack of consistency in definitions, and that when discussing god it's necessary to establish first what kind of god you're talking about.

Jesus isn't historical? 

I have a feeling he doesn't want to answer me because there is no evidence to give.

I think we're supposed to be doing our own reseach, in order to avoid being classed as intellectually lazy atheists.  Frankly, I'll accept the label because I really don't care enough -- all the "evidence" I've read to this point has struck me as weak and circular, and I've got other books calling my name. 

[Sweetdeath]

Ramen to that, BooksCatsEtc.

[Tank]

I think its pretty obvious that creating severe birth defects is not a loving act. I think its pretty obvious that creating flesh-eating bacteria is not a loving act. I think it's pretty obvious that asking a man to kill his son as a test is not a loving act. Shall I go on? There is much pain and suffering in the world. This is inconsistant with an infinately loving creator.

And of course removal of ALL pain = infinitely loving.

Bullshit. The removal of ALL pain is death!

[Too Few Lions]

OP said :    I am 100% certain the omni-everything Judeo-Christian-Islamic god does not exist. The reasons are simple, but here is only one:
1) This god is alleged to be the ultimate in love.
2) This god is alleged to have created everything.
1) & 2) are a logical contradiction; ergo, this god can not exist.
REPLY:  I fail to see why #1 and 2  are contradictions  ;    if there is a personal theistic Creator (viz. God) who by volitional choice brought a Universe into existence when it didnt have to exist.... along with providing a very suitable place as Earth for humankind to flourish (being his most prized creative act )... that it would seem to be an exhibit of extraordinary love/care/concern  .  At least this is what my Theist friends have expressed to me.

Another problem that I have with the idea of a 'loving' creator god is the end fate of the Earth. The Sun's expanding and getting brighter, eventually it will vaporise all water on the Earth and destroy all life here. It will then keep on expanding and most probably vaporise the Earth. That doesn't seem to fit with the idea of a loving creator...

[Gawen]

I think its pretty obvious that creating severe birth defects is not a loving act. I think its pretty obvious that creating flesh-eating bacteria is not a loving act. I think it's pretty obvious that asking a man to kill his son as a test is not a loving act. Shall I go on? There is much pain and suffering in the world. This is inconsistant with an infinately loving creator.

And of course removal of ALL pain = infinitely loving.

Bullshit. The removal of ALL pain is death!

Loving someone too much is a pain as well. Hence the saying "He/she smothered me to death."

Still what did this god love before it made us? How would it love? What frame of reference would it have to even know love? Or hate? Or indifference?

[The Magic Pudding]

Still what did this god love before it made us? How would it love? What frame of reference would it have to even know love? Or hate? Or indifference?

I can imagine cool ideas of god if we ditch the omnipotence crap.
Where did that come from?
I did the seven year old argie bargy, I'm superman,
ye your superman x2, well I'm x4, times infinity ya say, well I'm infinity times infinity.

I've been dreaming in the dark for forever, nothing feels, nothing cares, nothing laughs and nothing cries.
My creation screams and asks why, I answer "you" but it doesn't seem to satisfy.

Ye I'm just messing about.

[AnimatedDirt]

I think its pretty obvious that creating severe birth defects is not a loving act. I think its pretty obvious that creating flesh-eating bacteria is not a loving act. I think it's pretty obvious that asking a man to kill his son as a test is not a loving act. Shall I go on? There is much pain and suffering in the world. This is inconsistant with an infinately loving creator.

And of course removal of ALL pain = infinitely loving.

Bullshit. The removal of ALL pain is death!

Are you calling my sarcasm bullshit?  lol...

[Heisenberg]

I think we're supposed to be doing our own reseach, in order to avoid being classed as intellectually lazy atheists.  Frankly, I'll accept the label because I really don't care enough -- all the "evidence" I've read to this point has struck me as weak and circular, and I've got other books calling my name. 

This. When christians tell atheists to read the bible, I'm wondering why I would possibly waste my time. Every passage I've read seems like pretentious bullshit, and that's enough for me to go on. Besides, there are way too many fascinating books out there waiting to be read to waste one's time reading 2000 year old drivel.

[Sweetdeath]

I think we're supposed to be doing our own reseach, in order to avoid being classed as intellectually lazy atheists.  Frankly, I'll accept the label because I really don't care enough -- all the "evidence" I've read to this point has struck me as weak and circular, and I've got other books calling my name. 

This. When christians tell atheists to read the bible, I'm wondering why I would possibly waste my time. Every passage I've read seems like pretentious bullshit, and that's enough for me to go on. Besides, there are way too many fascinating books out there waiting to be read to waste one's time reading 2000 year old drivel.

Yeah. I'm reading Arthurian books right now.

I find the bible stories extremely boring to waste my time with them.

[Gawen]

Yeah. I'm reading Arthurian books right now.

I find the bible stories extremely boring to waste my time with them.

Psssst....

Get the Skystone series by Jack Whyte.

[Sweetdeath]

Yeah. I'm reading Arthurian books right now.

I find the bible stories extremely boring to waste my time with them.

Psssst....

Get the Skystone series by Jack Whyte.

Does it have homoerotic undertones? >D
My gf has me addicted to homerotic fantasy stuff at the moment.

[Gawen]

Yeah. I'm reading Arthurian books right now.

I find the bible stories extremely boring to waste my time with them.

Psssst....

Get the Skystone series by Jack Whyte.

Does it have homoerotic undertones? >D
My gf has me addicted to homerotic fantasy stuff at the moment.

Nope...

[fluttershine]

Does it have homoerotic undertones? >D
My gf has me addicted to homerotic fantasy stuff at the moment.
[/quote]

Homoeroticism is amazing.

Oh, ahem. I mean, it's alright. -hides collection-

Continue with topic, please. 

[Sandra Craft]

Does it have homoerotic undertones? >D
My gf has me addicted to homerotic fantasy stuff at the moment.

Homoeroticism is amazing.

Oh, ahem. I mean, it's alright. -hides collection-

Continue with topic, please. 

What a great derail this could be.  **controls self**  What was the original topic?  Oh yeah, debating the existence of a god with theists.

When push comes to shove, I'm not sure there's any point in that (other than the intellectual fun of it), even if they bring it up.  Most of the theists I know seem to believe what they do for emotional reasons, and those don't change in the face of facts and logic.  Sometimes being shown where their beliefs are wobbly makes them cling to those beliefs that much harder, rather than re-evaluate them as you would with a wobbly fact.

[Sweetdeath]

Yes, back on topic. Sorry guys

I've also observed many theists feel a huge weight or guilt about every decision they make in life. "does this please my god? Is that okay?"

I don't know. It makes me laugh. I don't need to rush to church if I curse or accidently fart in a public place.
(i totally fart anywhere, as long as it isnt smelly >_> )