Hitch is dead

Non Believers do the same thing. Admittedly, the primary "weapon" of nonbelievers is to attempt to find the evidence that discredits and picks apart the stories which form the basis of Christian belief. jar always said to throw God away, but I as a believer could never do that. What I have done in my mind is to suspend my belief in the inerrancy of the Logos and keep my faith strong regarding the Rhema which I feel is internal, personal, and by necessity subjective. In other words, I will throw the book away in order to give you your points in a given argument (if they have well-supported evidence behind them) but what I won't do is to fail to follow the example of Peter in the stories who knew who Jesus was not through logic, reason, and reality but through revelation. I happen to believe that humans will never make a brave new world as strident secularists. The reason? The failures of human morality will always come around and bite us in the butt. Stile and Tangle have made a good point that within organized religion itself this is also true, and I won't defend us in regards to that. I believe that we will see freedom of speech challenged through the excuse of public safety. I believe that the humanist manifesto will give rise to a global "religion" of sorts....a seeming ideal of love, tolerance, and mutual respect but in fact a belief devoid of any power without mandatory human cooperation. This will prove to be a huge mistake, but sometimes we have to learn the hard way.Edited by Phat, : added features

Not necessarily. Why must the presence of this God be obvious (equally) to every sentient creature? The perception of absence is due entirely to lack of evidence, but evidence is not (or should not) be the only standard. For most of my life, I knew about God, the character in the book, and subject of mythos. I knew of other magical human-created legends as well. The day that I publically confessed and surrendered stands out to this day as a day that impacted me and a day in which I truly felt, believed, and daresay *knew* that I had met God. A couple of years later, my one memorable encounter with something unexplained, voices out of nowhere, no evidence of trickery or deception, hair standing on end and a keen awareness of what I heard(also heard by 3 others who would tell you the same story to this day) confirmed to me that there was a supernatural realm. (or at the very least an unexplained event.) Since then, I have heard similar stories. You wont find this on You Tube. Now why is that?

When I first heard voices that came not from any human or hidden device (after later further verification) I too was baffled. Still am. The difference between me and you is you would keep looking for evidence until the cows came home, never allowing yourself to accept the weakness of surrendering to a belief. Perhaps that is a strength, i don't know.

Not so. I prefer a relationship (or at least an open line) to the God W\ho Is. And what I go by is what impressions I get which I discern come from Him. God is not simply cute. I don't limit Him to some ancient despot described in a book, either. God is as current as the latest news.I can't deny what I have experienced (without questioning my sanity) and I have even gone so far as to do that. This is going to be an ongoing issue in society for the next twenty years. Not all Christians will be as some are, but unfortunately, the loudest bleaters will get the most press and reflect on the rest of us negatively to a scientific, humanist, and (they think) reality-based world view.
The belief that I have that will annoy people the most is that not only is Jesus necessary for life, empathy, and love to even exist but that He will judge the humanists for professing themselves to be wise when they are, in fact off the mark. (no pun intended )

I agree with GDR. Put up or shut up. Enlighten us. What *is* it? Your answer will show your true colors.

What do you mean by rational? Last night I was at church and literally felt the presence of the Holy Spirit. I was crying profusely, something I never do. God is not simply a character in the book. But I will never convince you. Perhaps He can. But in the interests of debate and our ongoing discussions, I will attempt a valid argument for you and jar...when I get the time.

Do you mean the flood in the book? How well do you know this character?

And yet you and many atheists have already concluded that "My" God and the "God" described by many Christians is made up.You can say that I live a fantasy, and if so, many others will soon join me.
I would counter charge that you and many others will be in fact living a delusion.Wake up and smell the coffee!
Watch the news. Listen to some of the plans being discussed to track humanity via smartphone technology. Figure out that money will likely crash soon. Put 2 and 2 together and come up with a way to resurrect a global financial system.And look into things like biomarkers genetically engineered into vaccines. Explain why the army is administering the vaccines and why they may become mandatory.Would you really prefer a world of socialists who claim a sort of brotherly love for each other and the planet (without religion)? Do you actually think that is humanly possible? What does past evidence show in every previous form of government?

Yeah. Control and manipulation. Honesty perhaps? A desire to share an important feeling with others in order to help them as it helped you? I might point out that we (Biblical Christians)believe in a real and a corresponding counterfeit.
"How were Pharaoh’s magicians able to perform miracles?"
Reasonable doubt is healthy and expected. We dont want the whole room to simply become brainwashed into an irrational belief. I would argue, however, that we dont have skepticism beyond a reasonable doubt either. Contrast this with this: In other words, Seek Jesus and not signs and wonders. If you find Him, He will transform your mind and signs and wonders will follow you as you go around helping people, healing them, feeding them, loving them. The keys are to be humble rather than proud, honest, and with no ulterior motives.Edited by Phat, : No reason given.Edited by Phat, : No reason given.Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

No, but the idea that in the beginning was chemicals is just plain silly.You can argue that until the cows come home, but it makes far less intrinsic sense than does the premise of a mind as the origin of all.

Let's start here. I DO know God better than the atheists do. All they know is what was written about God. And they don't even know the authors who wrote about Him. I DO NOT claim to know the book better than the authors. And I'm not so vain and egotistical as to attempt to write my own book. As a believer, I am a work in progress. "OK, let's book Him, Inspector jar! Wait...whats that? We have no evidence? But surely this Flood had to have happened...after all, it's in the book!" You can't claim that God is limited to a character in the book and then turn around and charge the character with committing atrocities, claiming to prove the motive of that character.You waffle back and forth, don't you? You use something written in the book when it supports your argument, yet dismiss other things as apologetic fantasies.I suppose I do the same thing. Yet for me, belief in "The Flood" is unnecessary for my faith. Some things could be metaphorical. Either that or it all could be magical. Which is possible. Ringo, the only evidence you will ever ever have in your life will be the believers themselves. There are some genuine ones. They are the real deal and they walk in power and anointing.But you don't think that God is even necessary, do you? You have a lot still to learn in the remaining years of your life. Let's get back to the Book, shall we? We have no evidence that God Himself committed any crimes. That is, unless you strip Him of His right to judge people who were proven unworthy and incapable of learning to do better.But lets focus on the NT. I dont recall throwing any of it out. If it pleases the court, present any evidence that I have thrown so much as a page of the NT away from my apologetic pile of goodies. And this just after accusing me of being arrogant! Why should we trust your teaching skills? Anybody can read word for word what a book says. It takes a good teacher to suggest a deeper meaning.You just don't happen to agree with any of the teachers. John 3:16 for starters. Honestly, though, I am humbled.Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

So why do we have believers? Why would a rational guy such as yourself believe that God exists when there is not any evidence? Do you limit God to a character of the human mind and imagination?

Some people are great at hypothetical arguments of logic and evidence yet do not understand that there are basically two different kinds of spirits. One is the Creative Spirit of the Creator of all seen and unseen. We are commanded to test the spirits and can discern the type of any we encounter based on the content of their presence and how we respond to it and interact with it.And this is where jar and ringo are correct. The only way that it could ever be determined which spirit I operate under is by my works and what I do.of course, some do not recognize the Holy Spirit as any different than a ghost in a house. One difference is that a ghost would not have the power to brainwash an entire audience. The Holy Spirit would, but likely would not resort to manipulation and control. The Holy Spirit draws all men towards God. It remains their decision to allow or resist such a call.

You dont know that claim. At best you can say that I dont know it either, but you cant stand on a claim that has not been proven or disproved. That won't fly here.

I will claim special privilege. There is only One God. You are free to attempt toi question it, disprove it, laugh at it or ignore it, but you wont force me to retract my claim. If I didn't speak up, the rocks would cry out and you would be stuck trying to disprove what you heard.