Search results

That's what I was proposing exactly :)

I would be inclined to wonder where science and theology come into conflict with one another. Atheism is atheism, nothing else - neither science nor logicality are specific trademarks of the atheist belief. Granted, one who values such traits to the point of excess is more likely to be of an...

That was a joke, as it ends in -ism. Sorry if that wasn't apparent.

I believe a pretty simple way to look at this point is to say: "Well, if the planet wasn't actually 100% perfect for habitation, then who would be here to take note of that fact?". The earth is suited amazingly well to human life, but its not really a miracle that we are here - because if the...

I am in total agreement with you in that regard.

That argument is weak as well, I would have refuted it had I been reading the thread at that point. Human ethics would most likely be at a very similar place with or without the influence of religion. On the other side of this argument, I must reject the common concept that we would live in...

That is exactly the idea that I'm trying to convey here. Pointless is a value judgement, so I'll disregard that for the sake of the discussion. But many of the posters need to think outside of the conventional definitions of "God" and what it means to be spiritual, not religious per se. This...

I'm not saying anything definite, as I said earlier I'm just provoking further debate and attempting to sink as many arguments as possible along the way. But yes, the way you put it is a possibility that few people have thought to explore. The existence of God is not dependant on human...

I never knew you were psychic :-D EDIT: Not-That-Bright, discrediting religion is one thing. Discrediting the existence of god is completely another. My argument is that noone can push either point conclusively.

I'd be more than happy to accomodate you if you'd point out anywhere in the quote where I support the religious side of this argument. I won't be knocking on your door because I don't have a religious affiliation. Try again :P

A somewhat naive approach to uncovering truths. I am not a fan of the bible, but it does contain historical truths which cannot be refuted. It does NOT however, prove the existence of a god in any way - but nor does it disprove it. I may also remind you that "God" is not a Christian or for...

Wether the morals are shared by humanism or not doesn't mean that they do or don't exist in religious texts, if you follow my meaning. "Kill gays" is something I have yet to encounter, "Love thy neighbour" would seem more representative of religious attitudes. Granted, there are groups who are...

Totally subjective.

That's really not worth arguing, Kleaver. A shipwreck has less holes than that argument. Sophie: I didn't debate that it 'proved' his point, but was saying that it could just as easily be used to 'prove' the reverse side of the argument. Hence, unconclusive.

Your reasoning is sound, but there's nothing to stop someone on the other side of the argument saying "But its a miracle that they didn't all die" or what not. A line of petri dishes is hardly as complex as the creation of the universe. The argument isn't particularly convincing for either...

Nuh. That's neither here nor there. Certainty is in no way related to correctness.