annoying_anti_atheist_arguments p2 there are two arguments that religious people fall back on when cornered by the logic of others or a gap in their own logic the first one is that religion is faith-based therefore you cannot come to a conclusion from logic this one is only slightly annoying because i agree whole-heartedly religion is purely faith-based otherwise it'd be a science now if folks just left it at that, it wouldn't be annoying but they don't they try to argue it out expounding on any point that they think can prove what is completely faith-based falling back on this argument once their points have been eliminated and the next person they see they will try the same arguments again the only reason i can think for this is to find some weak minded person who will not find the flaws of their reasoning and convert them which seems pretty deceptive to me it would be more respectable if when i say "there is no god" that you say "religion is faith-based so there's no point in arguing with you" and it would be even more respectable to not to bother to say anything at all since you know where this will end up the second and most annoying argument is that god is god and you are not so god's reasoning is beyond your comprehension ugh the theological equivalent of "because i said so, that's why" there is no response to this except disgust because this single argument has invalidated all human logic that same logic that the person across from you has been using to try to prove you wrong 050224 ... ... Bush_is_Osama: Why_NOT? ... 050224 ... Given world's_'number_1'_terrorist 050224 ... stork daddy the only strictly logical theory, one that does not invoke probability but rather strict inferences from proven facts, is agnosticism. the existence of god can no more be proven than the non-existence. 050224 ... stork daddy all we can say we know is what we actually know. this world exists, there are causes we can determine, there are causes we can infer, and there are causes that seem probable based on the sum totality of what we know. the athestic stance seems probable, but is not known, for there are a variety of causes we do not yet know. does this mean that the existence of god or lack of god cannot be known? the only honest answer to that is that we do not yet know. to be scientific we must say that such statements are currently outside the scope of our knowledge, even if our current theories support the probability of one or the other. 050224 ... oldephebe Well. Geez. I'm realy not sure how to respond to this page. Not that anything has been adressed to me or anything like that. Maybe, just maybe I have mind too obtuse or too uninspired or lazy, yeah let's just say lazy and stop all the aw shucks self-deprecating postures Okay? So maybe I have a mind not necessarily too obtuse, but surely waaaaay too lazy to (warning facile and insouciant and not neccessarily belonging to any logical thread of logical continuity anywhere, and surely not here...soooo..)play pin the phenomenological flag on the objectively observed donkey (if it really IS a donkey how does one verify that?) And ah yeah these days I am not exactly the best salesman or person to represent God or Allah or any kind of faith, as faith in me feels like a guy panting in a desert w/o water. Man. Does that constitute any kind of logical or epistemological refutation or exposition? NO. Hey. It's like this. If you believe in Him/Her cool. If you don't cool. I don't feel the obligation to try and prove God's existence to you or win you by the somewhat conter-intuitive advesarial nature of debate to God. Sooo God's got a pretty healthy ego, so it's no skin off my back if you chose to go your own way. The best thing a christian or a person of faith can do to reveal the naute of God's heart, is not by running his/her mouth and showing how well he/her has memorized the scriptures or learned the art of debate or prosyletization by some absurd performance and emotional or vaudevillian antics as you flap your wing/elbows and strut across the pulpit or lunchroom or breakroom or whatever..a christian reveals god's nature by the life he/she lives. that's the most powerful witness a person can give. Peace ... 050224 ... p2 sd well said oe sorry i didn't mean to infer that this was addressed to you in jesus_is_hitler i was only redirecting your attention because it was inspired by you though through reading your writing it is very plain that you are a que sera sera type of guy when it comes to religion 050224 ... RIC naute should read nature as in "the best thing a person of faith can do to reveal the nature of Gods' hearts is to live a life out of that heart..." okay so i changed it...i'm lazy and my memory is shot so there! 050224 ... oldephebe N-N-N-N-N-N-N-NONooooooo NO NO NO NO Let us or me be clear here about what I am que ser sera sera about. I could care 2 bits about the pro-forma and rigorous observance of a book of rules or any religion that requires strict observance of these performatives in order to sweat out our salvation or something...if that's not what you were inferring then just attribute this pique ridden response to a certain alignment of the celestial bodies w/r/t my Cancerian mood and Gemini house if that even makes any sense because as of two sentences ago i'm just riffing...Religion as a faith and not just some regimented observance of patriarchical and geez nowadays political rubric i say that dishonestly delineates a so called divinely inspired relationship between religion and said political party as a pretext for forwarding a political platform and it's candidates for the consolidation of POWER and influence....soooo...I like to think of my religion more like a faith. But not a do as you please cause god forgives everything so sin and play spin the bottle and guess how many times i've fornicated today and guess how much god still oves me kind of a thing okay? I am que sera sera sera about debating the merits of God vs. phenomenological indices of the objective and observable world and well doesn't that in and of itself constitute a governing rubric that renders religion obsolete or at least the observance thereof kind of well passe and a little sad..? well i think a true marxist would be able to put it a lot better than me...but what a lot of marxist thought lacks is the roadmap to negotiating the existential experience of a modern life.... blah blah p2 - you're a riot and pretty brilliant and coherent and boy i'm in the mood for some general tso's chicken so ... 050224 what's it to you? who go blather from