sleepingwraith said:
quote:
so im guessing weve all settled on the fact that we know nothing and no matter what we say we will get no where...
Most might say yes to this, but I would say no.
More times than not, I find that those who say we can know nothing haven't given a fair and serious look for God. I even say the same thing about many Christians who know nothing about their faith; they beleive blindly without looking and their faith is based on emotions and feelings or the need to fill a gap left by tragedy in their lives.
The complaints from those who deny God are typically the same. Most outright deny God exists at the beginning of any such conversation, therefore being bias from the get go. I'm not saying that bias is completely wrong in every such conversation. Everyone is bias when they hold any certain viewpoint - even when that viewpoint is thoroughly refutable. The problem with bias comes when someone shows their closed-mindedness to said topic without showing that the other's viewpoint is irrational and unreasonable.
It typically comes down to that, or they choose not to believe in God based on the actions of human beings. Many complaints have to do with atrocities such as the Crusades or the seemingly mindboggling way that different factions of Christians, Muslims or such said religion do not get along. Although these may be valid reasons to turn your head and walk away from these kinds of people, remember, humans will act the same way they always have - in an imperfect human manner. This has no bearing on the answer for the existence of God and in no way refutes God's existence.
Although this is kind of a rant, I see that the majority of this thread hasn't given much of a refute to the existence of God. Maybe this is because no one here has given very much evidence for reasonalbe belief in God's existence. You can only refute proposed ideas and evidences, not a figment of someone's imagination.
I still wish to make a lot of the evidence known for the existence of the Jewish/Christian God, but such is a hard task in that there is a lot out there and that much of it must be considered as a whole to understand its reasonableness. The studies of history, archaeology and science hold numerous evidence for the existence of Christ and belief in his resurrection. And if this is true, taking into account that Christ believed that God was his father, we can see that belief in God would be reasonable. That is, if it really came from a man who had the authority to do the great things he did, and on top of that, rise from the dead.
But like I said, I can't write a book about all of it here on this forum, and being that there are numerous books out there on this topic I don't really see a reason to.
But as for sleepingwraith's comment, I would still have to say no. No matter what we say, people are still going to believe what they want to believe. And most are going to do so without taking a serious look at what may be true. This will get us nowhere. But to those who keep asking valid questions and look zealously for answers, only good can come. Those who don't will stay here at captain cynic looking for arguements to get into.
My Posts
38yrs • M • 
note that at times I use alternates for parathesis? 
