Changes

:--[[User:Ymmotrojam|Ymmotrojam]] 14:49, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

:--[[User:Ymmotrojam|Ymmotrojam]] 14:49, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

::A point worth considering:

::A point worth considering:<br />Jack, you keep insisting that those who believe what the Bible teaches about God need to prove his existence.  However, if they are correct, then proof is impossible.  Here's why:

::Jack, you keep insisting that those who believe what the Bible teaches about God need to prove his existence.  However, if they are correct, then proof is impossible.  Here's why:

::# God commanded His followers to have faith.

::1. God commanded His followers to have faith.

::# Faith is, by definition, belief in the absence of proof.

::2. Faith is, by definition, belief in the absence of proof.

::# Proof negates faith.  If something is proven, it is no longer a matter of faith.

::3. Proof negates faith.  If something is proven, it is no longer a matter of faith.

::# Therefore, if God exists, and if He truly wants His children to have faith, then He will not allow Himself to be unequivocably proven.

::4. Therefore, if God exists, and if He truly wants His children to have faith, then He will not allow Himself to be unequivocably proven. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 17:18, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

::--[[User:Benp|Benp]] 17:18, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

 

:::Benp, I would respectfully disagree with you. Rather faith is by definition, a response to the evidence you have. It does not mean you have every detail, but you do have something. Even Abraham, who God called to leave his homeland and go to the land of Canaan was relying on some evidence (God had talked to him). Now it's one's own choice to respond to the evidence (God's word, the witness of the conscience, the witness of the Holy Spirit, etc), but faith is not blind and without proofs at all. --[[User:Ymmotrojam|Ymmotrojam]] 17:32, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

==Absurd==

==Absurd==

This is just silly.  The vast majority of creationists are not like PJR: they do not have even the skein of science over it.  While I think he is wrong and so are the "creation scientists" who go through their elaborate contortions, they are a step up from the average.  The average creationist believes God created the world, and that is that.  Nothing more to it.  If there is any proof otherwise, they believe he created it and so it is moot.  This is why I am a Last Thursdayist, since I think the universe was created last Thursday, somewhere around three in the afternoon.  It's also why this challenge is pointless.  And even if it wasn't, it is irrational and poorly phrased.  Knock it off and quit being a Hitchens, JackSmith.--[[user:TomMoore|<font color="#000066" >Tom Moore</font>]]^{[[User talk:TomMoore|fiat justitia ruat coelum]]} 14:27, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

This is just silly.  The vast majority of creationists are not like PJR: they do not have even the skein of science over it.  While I think he is wrong and so are the "creation scientists" who go through their elaborate contortions, they are a step up from the average.  The average creationist believes God created the world, and that is that.  Nothing more to it.  If there is any proof otherwise, they believe he created it and so it is moot.  This is why I am a Last Thursdayist, since I think the universe was created last Thursday, somewhere around three in the afternoon.  It's also why this challenge is pointless.  And even if it wasn't, it is irrational and poorly phrased.  Knock it off and quit being a Hitchens, JackSmith.--[[user:TomMoore|<font color="#000066" >Tom Moore</font>]]^{[[User talk:TomMoore|fiat justitia ruat coelum]]} 14:27, 17 June 2008 (EDT)