Why Doesn't God Communicate With Us Anymore?

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]akram.mohamed wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
… And something can’t be invisible and pink to begin with…[/quote]

This was very clever.[/quote]

No, it isn’t. The invisible pink unicorn is designed to point out the flaws in religious thinking. Don’t be stupid, L2Google if you are unsure.[/quote]

Yeah. Its almost like I intentionally used an example of believing in something which is illogical for several reaso—

oh. I see what I did there. How clever that DD caught it.

[quote][quote]

Pearls before swine.[/quote]

so is that the default position when someone questions your truth? [/quote]

Certainly not. It is reserved for certain incorrigible individuals wholly uninterested in being swayed from the hard-headed point of view they’ve already adopted.

You’re not going to try and convince us that you were looking to do anything other than tear forbe’s replies apart, are you?

Be honest.

TheBodyGuard,

You’re just all upset because you were called out on your numerous logical fallacies. And of course the fact that you’re a total fraud and a would be Internet bully. I’m sure this is nothing new for you others have had to put you in your place before. You’ll get over it.

Do some deep breathing.

Zeb

You guys can blow ALL the smoke and bend the mirrors any way you want, but it STILL doesn’t change the SELF ADMITTED FACT that MAN is the source of ALL of the content of your religion.

You CANNOT say for certainty WHAT inspired a person two thousand years ago. Greed or divine inspiration (or delusion…) You cannot say for sure. No matter HOW much you twist it!

While you BELIEVE they were “divinely inspired”, you cannot PROVE it! Scriptures written by MEN are not PROOF!

So because I have the fortune to not have been brainwashed from an early age, have a critical mind and mature boundary function that allows me to sniff BULLSHIT when it is presented to me, that makes me SWINE?

Fine by me. I assure you I am perfectly content to “wallow in my filth” as I’m sure you are implying. At least I have the freedom to think for myself and understand that my actions and decisions have consequences that reach far beyond saying ten “hail Marys” and five “our fathers” (or whatever form of “forgiveness” you people delude yourselves into thinking is OK). My mission is clear, my conscience is clean and I am walking MY path with integrity.

For the record, I don’t CARE what you believe - but when you stoop to calling ME “swine” because your beliefs don’t meet my burden of proof, THAT’S what opens the door for me to go open season on your ass. Do you see me making fun of Hindu’s? Or Buddhists? NO! Why not? Because they don’t cram their religion down my throat, knock on my fucking door, or go around calling me a sinner for having a different belief.

I am successful, meet my obligations with my family and children and have my life together more than MOST people… But I’m SWINE… Because I don’t believe what YOU believe (any you can’t prove that you’re beliefs are real). Gotcha. I’ll leave you judgmental assholes to continue on with your miserable little lives then.

But AC, you’ll miss out on ‘pearls’ like “An invisible man who is living up in the sky will punish you for eternity for masturbating!” or “You’re bad because a talking snake convinced a woman to eat a magic apple!”

Or “God made plants before he made the sun to refute future claims that genesis is a metaphor!” (Personally one of my favorites)

For those who are confused about the reference “casting pearls before swine” hopefully this will help you out:

The passage is from Matthew 7:6 when Jesus was giving the sermon on the mount.

“Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.”

This was meant as a warning to Christians who would try to influence those who were violent men full of rage and would harm them. Men who have been preached to repeatedly and turned away repeatedly. Are there parallels between this verse and the atheists on this thread, perhaps. But over all the atheists on this thread are hardly violent at least not under these circumstances. And while we have one Internet tough guy atheist who threatens to beat people up, truth be told he’s probably the biggest sissy on the site. Hence, the masquerade.

Anyway…

What we have on this thread for the most part are young atheist males (with one exception) who basically despise Christianity and take every opportunity to ridicule God and mock Christianity (that’s part of what they feel atheism is all about-“we’re smarter than you na na na na”). What we, as Christians are doing on this thread is wasting our time as not one atheist will become a Christian because of this, or any other thread. None of this makes the atheists swine. But it does make us jackasses for continuing to quote scripture to those who not only don’t want to hear it but become inflamed because of it.

Better we meet them on their own terms, or just forget it all together.

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Better we meet them on their own terms, or just forget it all together.

[/quote]

The latter is probably the best choice. Aside from a little fun and entertainment, It really is fruitless to argue faith vs. proof when you have faith and the other doesn’t have proof.

Hence my disappearance from this once Capp ran his course with it.

Thing is, I still have faith. He exhausted the limits of his ability to prove.

One of the main fallacies of reason in this entire mismatch is the assumption that faith and proof are diametric ends of a continuum. They are not. They are wholly separate and unrelated.

Some people just can’t separate the two.

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Better we meet them on their own terms, or just forget it all together.

[/quote]

The latter is probably the best choice. Aside from a little fun and entertainment, It really is fruitless to argue faith vs. proof when you have faith and the other doesn’t have proof.

Hence my disappearance from this once Capp ran his course with it.

Thing is, I still have faith. He exhausted the limits of his ability to prove.

One of the main fallacies of reason in this entire mismatch is the assumption that faith and proof are diametric ends of a continuum. They are not. They are wholly separate and unrelated.

Some people just can’t separate the two.

[/quote]

Wait. Faith > Proof because you have faith and atheists don’t have “proof”?

Is this the tired burden of proof argument again? Seriously?

“Faith” is just a word for “I think stupid things and refuse to admit they make no sense.”

But, uh… Capped doesn’t know how the universe got here! There are things Capped doesn’t know – obviously this means Sky Wizard exists!!

Really, really stupid.

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Better we meet them on their own terms, or just forget it all together.

[/quote]

The latter is probably the best choice. Aside from a little fun and entertainment, It really is fruitless to argue faith vs. proof when you have faith and the other doesn’t have proof.

Hence my disappearance from this once Capp ran his course with it.

Thing is, I still have faith. He exhausted the limits of his ability to prove.

One of the main fallacies of reason in this entire mismatch is the assumption that faith and proof are diametric ends of a continuum. They are not. They are wholly separate and unrelated.

Some people just can’t separate the two.

[/quote]

Very well said. How does one go about proving faith? Much less over an Internet message board. In fact, it’s comical. And I’m laughing at both sides here. Christians, That’s why it’s called “faith”. As it says in the Bible,

Hebrews:

And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.

If someone really wants to share my experiences in faith and what I have to say they’ll pm me. And the same goes for every other Christian on the board. If you think that you’re furthering God’s kingdom by fighting with atheists on T Nation think again (and I’m preaching to myself as well). While you may be sincere, you will be no more effective than the atheists are at pulling you away from God. Each side is only guaranteed a loss and there are no exceptions.

If an atheist is going to change it will not come from any of us spouting scripture, or other religious dogma on T Nation. It will come from their own journey, their own suffering and ultimately their own free will.

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
You guys can blow ALL the smoke and bend the mirrors any way you want, but it STILL doesn’t change the SELF ADMITTED FACT that MAN is the source of ALL of the content of your religion.

You CANNOT say for certainty WHAT inspired a person two thousand years ago. Greed or divine inspiration (or delusion…) You cannot say for sure. No matter HOW much you twist it!

While you BELIEVE they were “divinely inspired”, you cannot PROVE it! Scriptures written by MEN are not PROOF!

So because I have the fortune to not have been brainwashed from an early age, have a critical mind and mature boundary function that allows me to sniff BULLSHIT when it is presented to me, that makes me SWINE?

Fine by me. I assure you I am perfectly content to “wallow in my filth” as I’m sure you are implying. At least I have the freedom to think for myself and understand that my actions and decisions have consequences that reach far beyond saying ten “hail Marys” and five “our fathers” (or whatever form of “forgiveness” you people delude yourselves into thinking is OK). My mission is clear, my conscience is clean and I am walking MY path with integrity.

For the record, I don’t CARE what you believe - but when you stoop to calling ME “swine” because your beliefs don’t meet my burden of proof, THAT’S what opens the door for me to go open season on your ass. Do you see me making fun of Hindu’s? Or Buddhists? NO! Why not? Because they don’t cram their religion down my throat, knock on my fucking door, or go around calling me a sinner for having a different belief.

I am successful, meet my obligations with my family and children and have my life together more than MOST people… But I’m SWINE… Because I don’t believe what YOU believe (any you can’t prove that you’re beliefs are real). Gotcha. I’ll leave you judgmental assholes to continue on with your miserable little lives then.[/quote]

WOW! You do realize that many of science’s “theories” are also unprovable? We can provide PROOF. But that proof will not PROVE anything. There will always be loopholes and “what ifs”.

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
“Faith” is just a word for “I think stupid things and refuse to admit they make no sense.”

But, uh… Capped doesn’t know how the universe got here! There are things Capped doesn’t know – obviously this means Sky Wizard exists!!

Really, really stupid.[/quote]The epistle to the Hebrews chapter 11: All emphases courtesy of the NASB translators.

[quote] 1Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. 2For by it the men of old gained approval.

  3By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible. 4By faith Abel offered to God a better sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained the testimony that he was righteous, God testifying about his gifts, and through faith, though he is dead, he still speaks. 5By faith Enoch was taken up so that he would not see death; AND HE WAS NOT FOUND BECAUSE GOD TOOK HIM UP; for he obtained the witness that before his being taken up he was pleasing to God. 6And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him. 7By faith Noah, being warned by God about things not yet seen, in reverence prepared an ark for the salvation of his household, by which he condemned the world, and became an heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.

  8By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed by going out to a place which he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing where he was going. 9By faith he lived as an alien in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, dwelling in tents with Isaac and Jacob, fellow heirs of the same promise; 10for he was looking for the city which has foundations, whose architect and builder is God. 11By faith even Sarah herself received ability to conceive, even beyond the proper time of life, since she considered Him faithful who had promised. 12Therefore there was born even of one man, and him as good as dead at that, as many descendants AS THE STARS OF HEAVEN IN NUMBER, AND INNUMERABLE AS THE SAND WHICH IS BY THE SEASHORE.

  13All these died in faith, without receiving the promises, but having seen them and having welcomed them from a distance, and having confessed that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. 14For those who say such things make it clear that they are seeking a country of their own. 15And indeed if they had been thinking of that country from which they went out, they would have had opportunity to return. 16But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God; for He has prepared a city for them.

  17By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was offering up his only begotten son; 18it was he to whom it was said, â??IN ISAAC YOUR DESCENDANTS SHALL BE CALLED.â?? 19He considered that God is able to raise people even from the dead, from which he also received him back as a type. 20By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau, even regarding things to come. 21By faith Jacob, as he was dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, and worshiped, leaning on the top of his staff. 22By faith Joseph, when he was dying, made mention of the exodus of the sons of Israel, and gave orders concerning his bones.

  23By faith Moses, when he was born, was hidden for three months by his parents, because they saw he was a beautiful child; and they were not afraid of the kingâ??s edict. 24By faith Moses, when he had grown up, refused to be called the son of Pharaohâ??s daughter, 25choosing rather to endure ill-treatment with the people of God than to enjoy the passing pleasures of sin, 26considering the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt; for he was looking to the reward. 27By faith he left Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king; for he endured, as seeing Him who is unseen. 28By faith he kept the Passover and the sprinkling of the blood, so that he who destroyed the firstborn would not touch them. 29By faith they passed through the Red Sea as though they were passing through dry land; and the Egyptians, when they attempted it, were drowned.

  30By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they had been encircled for seven days. 31By faith Rahab the harlot did not perish along with those who were disobedient, after she had welcomed the spies in peace.

  32And what more shall I say? For time will fail me if I tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets, 33who by faith conquered kingdoms, performed acts of righteousness, obtained promises, shut the mouths of lions, 34quenched the power of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, from weakness were made strong, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight. 35Women received back their dead by resurrection; and others were tortured, not accepting their release, so that they might obtain a better resurrection; 36and others experienced mockings and scourgings, yes, also chains and imprisonment. 37They were stoned, they were sawn in two, they were tempted, they were put to death with the sword; they went about in sheepskins, in goatskins, being destitute, afflicted, ill-treated 38(men of whom the world was not worthy), wandering in deserts and mountains and caves and holes in the ground.

  39And all these, having gained approval through their faith, did not receive what was promised, 40because God had provided something better for us, so that apart from us they would not be made perfect.

[/quote]

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote][quote]

Pearls before swine.[/quote]

so is that the default position when someone questions your truth? [/quote]

Certainly not. It is reserved for certain incorrigible individuals wholly uninterested in being swayed from the hard-headed point of view they’ve already adopted.

You’re not going to try and convince us that you were looking to do anything other than tear forbe’s replies apart, are you?

Be honest.[/quote]

I absolutely intend to consider his claims. You’re awfully presumptuous. If I wanted to “tear them apart”, I do not need any time to consider them. I will return with thoughtful questions and replies.

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Better we meet them on their own terms, or just forget it all together.

[/quote]

The latter is probably the best choice. Aside from a little fun and entertainment, It really is fruitless to argue faith vs. proof when you have faith and the other doesn’t have proof.

Hence my disappearance from this once Capp ran his course with it.

Thing is, I still have faith. He exhausted the limits of his ability to prove.

One of the main fallacies of reason in this entire mismatch is the assumption that faith and proof are diametric ends of a continuum. They are not. They are wholly separate and unrelated.

Some people just can’t separate the two.

[/quote]

You’re a bright guy, and that was…meh, kinda clever.

But it would be accurate if you’d say, you have your faith, and no proof.

I’m not sure the “other” doesn’t have “proof” if you consider “evidence of absence”. I can use up all the space in this thread listing “evidence of absence” while you’d be hard pressed to list uncontroverted evidence in support of your faith.

Is that an unfair statement?

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Better we meet them on their own terms, or just forget it all together.

[/quote]

The latter is probably the best choice. Aside from a little fun and entertainment, It really is fruitless to argue faith vs. proof when you have faith and the other doesn’t have proof.

Hence my disappearance from this once Capp ran his course with it.

Thing is, I still have faith. He exhausted the limits of his ability to prove.

One of the main fallacies of reason in this entire mismatch is the assumption that faith and proof are diametric ends of a continuum. They are not. They are wholly separate and unrelated.

Some people just can’t separate the two.

[/quote]

Wait. Faith > Proof because you have faith and atheists don’t have “proof”?

Is this the tired burden of proof argument again? Seriously?[/quote]

Kid, for someone that professes to be so dedicated to reason you can’t seem to distinguish the basic differences between tangible and intangible. You ran your own course and tripped over your own tongue. You cast aspersions about others intelligence and can’t even recognize your own lack.

To put it in words and concepts that even you can understand- No. This is not the burden of proof argument again. It is clarification that there is a difference between faith in supernatural concepts and proof of actual physical phenomenon, which you don’t seem to be able to grasp.

Really, run along. No one gives a fuck that you don’t believe in what they do. They’re fine. All you look like now is a nine year old that has wasted a whole lot of time coming up with reasons why you don’t want to go to church.

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Better we meet them on their own terms, or just forget it all together.

[/quote]

The latter is probably the best choice. Aside from a little fun and entertainment, It really is fruitless to argue faith vs. proof when you have faith and the other doesn’t have proof.

Hence my disappearance from this once Capp ran his course with it.

Thing is, I still have faith. He exhausted the limits of his ability to prove.

One of the main fallacies of reason in this entire mismatch is the assumption that faith and proof are diametric ends of a continuum. They are not. They are wholly separate and unrelated.

Some people just can’t separate the two.

[/quote]

Very well said. How does one go about proving faith? Much less over an Internet message board. In fact, it’s comical. And I’m laughing at both sides here. Christians, That’s why it’s called “faith”. As it says in the Bible,

Hebrews:

And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.

If someone really wants to share my experiences in faith and what I have to say they’ll pm me. And the same goes for every other Christian on the board. If you think that you’re furthering God’s kingdom by fighting with atheists on T Nation think again (and I’m preaching to myself as well). While you may be sincere, you will be no more effective than the atheists are at pulling you away from God. Each side is only guaranteed a loss and there are no exceptions.

If an atheist is going to change it will not come from any of us spouting scripture, or other religious dogma on T Nation. It will come from their own journey, their own suffering and ultimately their own free will.

[/quote]

Aren’t you the conqueror of “logical fallacies”. Hmmm.

Apparently, in your logical world, anyone not a Christian is an atheist? Is that correct? Or, are you willing to “back track” from your numerous posts referencing atheists where no man here has yet to claim such?

As for suffering, I can see yours clearly.

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
You guys can blow ALL the smoke and bend the mirrors any way you want, but it STILL doesn’t change the SELF ADMITTED FACT that MAN is the source of ALL of the content of your religion.

You CANNOT say for certainty WHAT inspired a person two thousand years ago. Greed or divine inspiration (or delusion…) You cannot say for sure. No matter HOW much you twist it!

While you BELIEVE they were “divinely inspired”, you cannot PROVE it! Scriptures written by MEN are not PROOF!

So because I have the fortune to not have been brainwashed from an early age, have a critical mind and mature boundary function that allows me to sniff BULLSHIT when it is presented to me, that makes me SWINE?

Fine by me. I assure you I am perfectly content to “wallow in my filth” as I’m sure you are implying. At least I have the freedom to think for myself and understand that my actions and decisions have consequences that reach far beyond saying ten “hail Marys” and five “our fathers” (or whatever form of “forgiveness” you people delude yourselves into thinking is OK). My mission is clear, my conscience is clean and I am walking MY path with integrity.

For the record, I don’t CARE what you believe - but when you stoop to calling ME “swine” because your beliefs don’t meet my burden of proof, THAT’S what opens the door for me to go open season on your ass. Do you see me making fun of Hindu’s? Or Buddhists? NO! Why not? Because they don’t cram their religion down my throat, knock on my fucking door, or go around calling me a sinner for having a different belief.

I am successful, meet my obligations with my family and children and have my life together more than MOST people… But I’m SWINE… Because I don’t believe what YOU believe (any you can’t prove that you’re beliefs are real). Gotcha. I’ll leave you judgmental assholes to continue on with your miserable little lives then.[/quote]

WOW! You do realize that many of science’s “theories” are also unprovable? We can provide PROOF. But that proof will not PROVE anything. There will always be loopholes and “what ifs”.[/quote]

That’s not quite fair. A theory is just that, a theory. Theories aren’t facts.

If there is evidence for Christianity beyond “faith”, you and every other Christian should be compelled to offer it. If there isn’t, you and every other Christian should be compelled to admit your belief rests on faith. I think that would render any debate moot. Agree?

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Better we meet them on their own terms, or just forget it all together.

[/quote]

The latter is probably the best choice. Aside from a little fun and entertainment, It really is fruitless to argue faith vs. proof when you have faith and the other doesn’t have proof.

Hence my disappearance from this once Capp ran his course with it.

Thing is, I still have faith. He exhausted the limits of his ability to prove.

One of the main fallacies of reason in this entire mismatch is the assumption that faith and proof are diametric ends of a continuum. They are not. They are wholly separate and unrelated.

Some people just can’t separate the two.

[/quote]

You’re a bright guy, and that was…meh, kinda clever.

But it would be accurate if you’d say, you have your faith, and no proof.

I’m not sure the “other” doesn’t have “proof” if you consider “evidence of absence”. I can use up all the space in this thread listing “evidence of absence” while you’d be hard pressed to list uncontroverted evidence in support of your faith.

Is that an unfair statement?[/quote]

Yes. It is unfair, as it missed the distinction between faith and proof. You can present all of the proof in the physical universe that God does not exist within the physical universe, as God very well should not.

Faith addresses the existence of something outside of what is known or provable.

Thats why it is faith.

Evidence of absence is somewhat redundant when you are trying to prove the existence of a supernatural being using physical proof. It’s not supposed to be there in the first place.

Even if the newer string theories and multi-verse theories are proven to be true of the physical universe, they can not and aren’t intended to prove or disprove the existence of God, a god, or any concept of God. They are designed to prove the origin of the natural universe, not disprove the existence of something outside of it.

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Better we meet them on their own terms, or just forget it all together.

[/quote]

The latter is probably the best choice. Aside from a little fun and entertainment, It really is fruitless to argue faith vs. proof when you have faith and the other doesn’t have proof.

Hence my disappearance from this once Capp ran his course with it.

Thing is, I still have faith. He exhausted the limits of his ability to prove.

One of the main fallacies of reason in this entire mismatch is the assumption that faith and proof are diametric ends of a continuum. They are not. They are wholly separate and unrelated.

Some people just can’t separate the two.

[/quote]

You’re a bright guy, and that was…meh, kinda clever.

But it would be accurate if you’d say, you have your faith, and no proof.

I’m not sure the “other” doesn’t have “proof” if you consider “evidence of absence”. I can use up all the space in this thread listing “evidence of absence” while you’d be hard pressed to list uncontroverted evidence in support of your faith.

Is that an unfair statement?[/quote]

Yes. It is unfair, as it missed the distinction between faith and proof. You can present all of the proof in the physical universe that God does not exist within the physical universe, as God very well should not.

Faith addresses the existence of something outside of what is known or provable.

Thats why it is faith.

Evidence of absence is somewhat redundant when you are trying to prove the existence of a supernatural being using physical proof. It’s not supposed to be there in the first place.

Even if the newer string theories and multi-verse theories are proven to be true of the physical universe, they can not and aren’t intended to prove or disprove the existence of God, a god, or any concept of God. They are designed to prove the origin of the natural universe, not disprove the existence of something outside of it.

[/quote]

Faith: Firm belief in something for which there is no proof (from Webster’s). That is one of the many definitions of faith and seemingly the one you are using above.

It is also one of the most ridiculous, dangerous, and stupid enterprises in which human beings have engaged in their short time on this planet. It is, by its very definition, an act of foolishness.

God, Invisible Pink Unicorn, Flying Spaghetti Monster, Big Foot–faith (as you seem to define it) in one is exactly as credible as faith in another. I am all for logical proofs of God’s existence–many are actually extremely convincing. But groundless belief? That is the business of lunatics and Scientologists.

Nowhere else in human life is it acceptable to accept a conclusion in the absence of any proof. Not in the courtroom, not in the boardroom, not even on the fucking playground: if my 9 year old cousin’s baseball glove went missing one day, and I told him that martians had descended from the heavens and made off with it, he would ask me HOW I KNOW…he would tell me to prove it. Because, even as a dumbass child, he understands that groundless claims are not to be entertained in intelligent discourse.

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Better we meet them on their own terms, or just forget it all together.

[/quote]

The latter is probably the best choice. Aside from a little fun and entertainment, It really is fruitless to argue faith vs. proof when you have faith and the other doesn’t have proof.

Hence my disappearance from this once Capp ran his course with it.

Thing is, I still have faith. He exhausted the limits of his ability to prove.

One of the main fallacies of reason in this entire mismatch is the assumption that faith and proof are diametric ends of a continuum. They are not. They are wholly separate and unrelated.

Some people just can’t separate the two.

[/quote]

Wait. Faith > Proof because you have faith and atheists don’t have “proof”?

Is this the tired burden of proof argument again? Seriously?[/quote]

Kid, for someone that professes to be so dedicated to reason you can’t seem to distinguish the basic differences between tangible and intangible. You ran your own course and tripped over your own tongue. You cast aspersions about others intelligence and can’t even recognize your own lack.

To put it in words and concepts that even you can understand- No. This is not the burden of proof argument again. It is clarification that there is a difference between faith in supernatural concepts and proof of actual physical phenomenon, which you don’t seem to be able to grasp.

Really, run along. No one gives a fuck that you don’t believe in what they do. They’re fine. All you look like now is a nine year old that has wasted a whole lot of time coming up with reasons why you don’t want to go to church.

[/quote]

You really got offended by the “die in a fire” remark, huh? Allow me to apologize for that. I’m sincerely sorry.

“It is clarification that there is a difference between faith in supernatural concepts and proof of actual physical phenomenon, which you don’t seem to be able to grasp.”

What you don’t seem to be able to grasp is that I’m taking issue with the claims OF actual physcial phenomenon (such as a demon possessing a snake and that snake gaining the ability to speak and that speaking snake convincing a woman to eat a fruit which grants knowledge through digestion). That’s not a ‘supernatural concept’, thats a claim about an actual physcial phenomenon. Christians, in particular, make claims about actual physcial phenomenon which, IF TRUE, would leave copious amounts of evidence behind - yet leave none. A flood of the ENTIRE WORLD would leave clear archeological proof - yet there is none. The sun and moon stopping in the middle of a battle would leave clear astrological proof - yet there is none. There would be historical evidence, from different cultural perspectives, if a pharaoh was killed and jews wandered the desert for decades - none such exists.

Has anyone ever proven or disproven the existence of a sentient creator god? No. Could it be done? I dont know.

But believers dont just make the claim that a god exists - they make a claim that a particular god exists, with particular qualities, with specific desires and plans and opinions (yet also claim that their god is beyond the scope of understanding when faced with a contradiction between their professed gods desires and reality). Yes, the problem of evil is among these problems, but others - like the title of this thread. IF God did make the habit of talking directly to people, why stop? If demons could possess snakes or make people “fall down”, why don’t demons continue to do these things? Did the demons get bored? Did God decide to put a stop to it? If so, why did he let it happen in the first place?

Its not just about unprovable things. Its about making claims that WOULD easily be proven IF they were true (yet have no proof to back them up). Its about making specific claims about supernatural things which, IF TRUE, would have a reliable effect on physical phenomena - yet do not.