Where are you on the political spectrum?

[Sarah]

Hell, I wasn't even quoting Mission of Burma.  Apocryphal Hermann Goering all the way.

[Trembling Eagle]

The fact is there *is* evidence that there is a God but there's no evidence of a jellybean/FSM thing. Now you may not be satisfied with the evidence but that's where the discussion should take place.

OK what is your evidence?

My evidence for the giant jellybean at the center of the universe is my own thoughts on it, the giant jellybean only communicates to humans through psychic projection (like Jesus). Therefore the fact that I feel his loving tentacles at my heart is proof enuff.

[cutout]

The fact is there *is* evidence that there is a God but there's no evidence of a jellybean/FSM thing. Now you may not be satisfied with the evidence but that's where the discussion should take place.

OK what is your evidence?

I wouldn't mind hearing the answer to this one. I guess people have wildly different ideas of what defines Evidence.

[Clint]

I never understand why people bring evidence and proof into the theism vs. atheism debate. One side is based on old books, stories and traditions and the other is based on science, something we don't fully understand. Neither would have any admissible evidence if this were a court case.

My personal belief is that if there is a God, he doesn't spend his all-powerful time caring about what people do or what people think of him. At best we would amuse him like ants in an ant farm (which aren't very amusing).


And to stay on subject, I'm a little south of Gandhi.

[JonFromMaplewood]

Someone should let Pastor Josh know that this thread is veering deep into his wheelhouse.

[Sploops]

My personal belief is that if there is a God, he doesn't spend his all-powerful time caring about what people do or what people think of him. At best we would amuse him like ants in an ant farm (which aren't very amusing).

Sounds like this dude: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ak3z2Pm7Iwg

[Pidgeon]

Is there a Godwin's Law equivalent to "any kind of conversation will eventually turn into a religious debate?"...not that I didn't contribute.

[JP]

The fact is there *is* evidence that there is a God but there's no evidence of a jellybean/FSM thing. Now you may not be satisfied with the evidence but that's where the discussion should take place.

OK what is your evidence?

My evidence for the giant jellybean at the center of the universe is my own thoughts on it, the giant jellybean only communicates to humans through psychic projection (like Jesus). Therefore the fact that I feel his loving tentacles at my heart is proof enuff.

First, you don't believe in a giant jellybean but are just continuing to play that one tired note. 

 As far as the evidence in God:

Once piece is written testimonies of people who have seen God.

There is logical evidence that there is God.

There are a lot (billions) of *sincere* people who in their hearts have testimonies that while perhaps not as weighty as the testimony of people who have what we would describe as the more direct testimonies of seeing, provides evidence.

I honestly can see how some people may not find the evidence sufficient but I think its still substantial. 

[Trembling Eagle]

I never understand why people bring evidence and proof into the theism vs. atheism debate. One side is based on old books, stories and traditions and the other is based on science, something we don't fully understand. Neither would have any admissible evidence if this were a court case.

My personal belief is that if there is a God, he doesn't spend his all-powerful time caring about what people do or what people think of him. At best we would amuse him like ants in an ant farm (which aren't very amusing).


And to stay on subject, I'm a little south of Gandhi.

My original point wasn't judgment on theism vs. atheism, I was disagreeing with Sarah's assertion that religious belief and atheism both required leaps of faith since they profess to have a conclusion about the nature of the universe that was ultimately unknowable/provable.

Since we live in and deal with a rational world we know if you drop something it falls towards gravity, wood and paper is flammable, water freezes at 32 degrees F etc. All these are verifiable points that can be repeated  and tested and the results can be compared. Over the course of human history through incremental observations about how the world works we have developed technology that aides us in our lives, for example the computers we are using now to communicate. The proof for supernatural forces in the world around us as far as I know is absent. So we get in our internal combustion engine vehicles to get to work by don't use our minds to teleport, or if we are injured in a accident and a limb is severed we go to a doctor that  will physically reattach it and us treatment to deal with shock and infection. We don't go to a shaman to dance around the severed limb and sprinkle salt on it.

So my point remains that it doesn't take faith to profess a non-supernatural view of the universe merely it's the most logical conclusion that flows out of a understanding the processes of nature.

[JonFromMaplewood]

First, you don't believe in a giant jellybean but are just continuing to play that one tired note. 

If I say over and over and over, "Nixon was a criminal because recordings and written documentation clearly show that he was aware of, and helped mastermind the Watergate cover-up",  it will get pretty tired. But does it become wrong?

[JP]

First, you don't believe in a giant jellybean but are just continuing to play that one tired note. 

If I say over and over and over, "Nixon was a criminal because recordings and written documentation clearly show that he was aware of, and helped mastermind the Watergate cover-up",  it will get pretty tired. But does it become wrong?

No but the frequency doesn't make it right either.  The main point was that he doesn't actually believe what he is saying - the fact that it's a weak argument is far less important.

[JP]

most logical conclusion

You may think it's the most logical - I just think that it must be acknowledged that it isn't the only conclusion worth considering.  And frankly if the God argument weren't worth considering an all you wouldn't have considered it.  (no one is actually believing in the jellybean thing because it's so *obviously* absurd)

Anyway I liked the fact that I thought TE was valuing two opposing viewpoints (theism vs atheism) which is why I chimed in - I think I misunderstood and the alternative viewpoint really isn't so legitimate to some of you guys.

[Trembling Eagle]

most logical conclusion

You may think it's the most logical - I just think that it must be acknowledged that it isn't the only conclusion worth considering.  And frankly if the God argument weren't worth considering an all you wouldn't have considered it.  (no one is actually believing in the jellybean thing because it's so *obviously* absurd)

Anyway I liked the fact that I thought TE was valuing two opposing viewpoints (theism vs atheism) which is why I chimed in - I think I misunderstood and the alternative viewpoint really isn't so legitimate to some of you guys.

Oh I think it's legitimate. Spirituality definitely has a place in human life.
But I believe it's important to draw a distinction between the natural world and the supernatural. If your finger gets cut off you better get your ass to a doctor (a medical doctor).

[Pidgeon]

most logical conclusion

You may think it's the most logical - I just think that it must be acknowledged that it isn't the only conclusion worth considering.  And frankly if the God argument weren't worth considering an all you wouldn't have considered it.  (no one is actually believing in the jellybean thing because it's so *obviously* absurd)

Anyway I liked the fact that I thought TE was valuing two opposing viewpoints (theism vs atheism) which is why I chimed in - I think I misunderstood and the alternative viewpoint really isn't so legitimate to some of you guys.

Oh I think it's legitimate. Spirituality definitely has a place in human life.
But I believe it's important to draw a distinction between the natural world and the supernatural. If your finger gets cut off you better get your ass to a doctor (a medical doctor).

I've never really thought of real spirituality as something supernatural. When I think of "spirituality" I think getting in touch with nature, meditating, psychedelic drugs, etc

[Fido]

I think I took this survey once before, and got the same result this time. Major lefty/libertarian. And I'm an ex-corporate type, but maybe the important part of that is ex.

I'm just to the left of Dave B, but slightly to the right of Sarah. Not that I'm surprised by that.