That's an interesting point of view, but Christianity is no different from other man-made religions. I can see how you think of your belief as something incredibly personal though.



I'm not questioning what you're saying here, but technically you're not right, but simply very convinced. The same is true for me, but with an opposing opinion.



Perhaps, but it's also a great part of what makes skeptics so weary.

Besides, the real 'simplicity' lies in the fact that it's not possible to actually provide proof of God's existence itself and as a result we will never know, or as I would say it doesn't change the extreme unlikeliness of God's existence or influence.

When it comes to simplicity, it only makes sense that if there really was a God, he would make himself known,

Cheers

My God man! Even Richard Dawkins admits that there may have been some intelligent source for the first living cell, and he's about as staunch an Atheist as there can be. How can you so confidently claim that there is no God?

There's a big difference in saying "I'm an Atheist, I don't believe in God" and "God is disproven, and can't exist." I've never heard anyone claim this. Do you leave no possibility for the slight chance that you might be wrong?

When was God disproven, who conducted the experiment? How was this accomplished, and which scientific body funded and approved this research? What were the control subjects in such an experiment? The Devil and the Spaghetti Monster? I want facts...

Sorry for sounding so outraged, but really? God was disproven?

The theory of evolution is not a fact, although many insist that it has been proven. Evolution requires faith too. Man cannot prove that God exists. God requires faith. God says in His word that without faith we cannot please Him and that it is only by faith we are righteous and can be saved. His words, not mine.

Evolution IS proven. Believing in evolution is not faith, it's knowledge. Believing in creationism requires faith just as the Invisible Pink Unicorn.

Actually, you're mistaken, Dawkins only admits the possibility, as the scientific approach of the subject simply demands that. An open mind, a lack of evidence. Lack of evidence isn't proof of the opposite.



One fact, when it comes to logic and rationality is that the whole God thing makes the least sense of all theories out there. Especially considered the overwhelming lack of evidence for divine intervention and of course the psychological aspect of religion(s).



Actually, big chunks of the theory have been proven. In fact, so much has been proven that it has become the leading theory among several.



Nope, these are still your words. You can't justify things by stating someone else said it and you're only acting in name of what that other person or being said.

History shows thát often leads to violently scary things. :P

Cheers

Actually it is. Religions are work based. Religion is man trying to reach God through good works. Christianity (true Christianity) is not a religion, but a relationship. Man is incapable of reaching God on his own, so God reached down to man and provided a way for us to be reconciled with Him.



Yes, I have a very personal relationship with the One and only true and living God. This is only possible through knowing Jesus Christ as my Savior. Of course this relationship is available to all and anyone who is willing to humble themselves and call upon the Name of the LORD to save him.



You and others may think that I am just simply very convinced, but God has revealed Himself in His word and continues to do so. He is alive and His word is alive. Yes, you may say that the same is true for you, but one of us is wrong.



Everyone will know one day, but you can know now. It is up to you.



He does make Himself known to anyone who seeks after Him.

Just because it is the leading theory does not make it true.



God says it, whether you believe Him or not is your choice.



Yes, man is evil and will use anything for evil. God will use it for good.

@PHeMoX:actually, he's not mistaken. "may have been" = "only admits the possibility". what you're saying isn't any different to what he said.
@HyperGraph:how do you know that tribal guy isn't going to pull out an incredibly logical and reasonable argument? and it's not necessarily about converting, but perhaps losing faith in your own beliefs. it's also about being a light to others, being able to defend the faith for their sake.

julz

That wasn't the point (but I suspect you know that). I was only saying that just because someone has not encountered the idea does not mean that they will instantly cave into it. There are billions of people on this planet and many of them have a variety of beliefs. We cannot be exposed to them all (nor would most of us want to be). Therefore, just because someone is not exposed to the belief does not mean they will instantly buy it. They might. They might not.

... any way, this looks to be an interesting discussion, though the latest posters (including myself) should go back and read the original poster's intent for this thread. I believe he asked us not to debate the merits of creationism/evolution, but about whether both should be taught in school and why.