aj/quote..""Atheism -in its strongest form-""

lol

""..is the rejection of a claim
as unsupported by evidence.""

funny the level of faith
seems proportional..to our various beliefs

you demand proof of god
yet refuse to test the personal good
..with an open heart..thus proof dont come....lol

circular diss-belief
a/thiest-sic*

""So to say that it’s not convincing""

i studied the 'science of evolution'
it talks of species level speciation
[as proving evolution into a new genus]

egsamining the changes
they are all at the species level
but NEVER a change of genus
[mice breed mice.cats breed cats]

life makes life
yet you have 'faith'..
in your belief..of a godless theory
so swallow the lie

""(particularly when those
who have the burden of proof
have not yet supplied the slightlest shred of it)""

yep just like with evolution
lots of 'science'..but not specificly ANY PROOF
[of even one reported/observed/let alone replicated change of genus]

no proof a..[cold-blood]..fish
can become a..{warm blood]..mammel

""shows an astonishing level of ignorance.""

yes you do

think of it like you thinking there isnt a god
as being LIKE thinking you cant walk

YOU KNOW..[you cant walk]
so you never try

its the same with god
it is him who sustaines all life
[isnt that enough?]

why say..god..[good]..*is walking the talk
then asking him...*to fly

BPT,

I'm fascinated at how often the word "militant" is bandied about by Christians referring to anyone who objects to their children being Christian indoctrinated in a supposedly secular school environment. It's almost becoming cliché - and seems to be employed by those who can't justify their stance.

Have you read the whole of Evonne Paddison's speech?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/55338278/ACCESS-Ministry-s-head-Evonne-Paddison-s-speech-to-Anglican-Evangelical-Fellowship

Scroll down to highlighted areas in yellow for points that non-Christian parents and community members might find objectionable.

Poirot

This bit has me concerned as well, it is like a call to arms:

"We are to be disciples and make disciples, we are not looking for astress free pampered existence, not seeking popularity, not seeking health andwealth and happiness but followers of Jesus who have taken up crosses.Reflecting his glory will inevitably mean following his path of humiliation andloss for the sake of bearing fruit. For the sake of winning others."

They don't care about our children all they care about is winning numbers.

As for topic.

I live in the Yarra Ranges, the trees form my cathedral, I am inspired and meditate here. However, none of that means there is a god, let alone that Christianity is true (or any other religion for that matter). Part of the wonder of our planet is its complexity within a near infinite universe - the words of the bible are nothing in comparison to real life.

Having spiritual feelings does not prove religion. Just that I am human.

Ammonite,

Yes, I agree that it's interesting to read the "whole" speech - not just grabs. The intent behind the speech is pretty clear...to look upon "access" to state schoolchildren as an open door to their indoctrination and discipleship into the Christian faith. Fairly blatant in its goal setting, it seems to me.

Poirot

Abundantly clear that ACCESS are violating the terms laid out for RE.

Reading through was like reading something from the Dark Ages without the 'thees & thous'. Nowhere was there any care exhibited for the well being of children - just a golden opportunity to harvest disciples.

Ironic if people complain about these religious groups, we are attacked for being religion haters.

Whatever happened to live and let live?

weareunique,

Thanks for your reply. Again, you have given me a lot to respond to.

<<The 'evidence' exists within an individual's/believer's own relationship with God AJ Philips. That's what you have never understood from OLO participants comments, who are believers.>>

I have always understood that position and it’s precisely the way I used to think when I was a Christian. But that is not reliable evidence if we really care about the truth of our beliefs and that’s what THEISTS have never understood.

Applied reasoning based on logical absolutes is the only reliable method we have of arriving at the truth given what we currently know. Even if you could find another method, how would you go about demonstrating that it was reliable without evidence and reasoning?

It all comes back to evidence and reason.

<<There is no requirement or necessity for people who are believers, to deliver or produce 'evidence' that God exists.>>

There is if they want to legislate according to those beliefs or convert others.

<<Another example whereby 'one' does not require tangible shreds to close the book on the concept of foreign beings existing out there in the beautiful universe…>>

This is a poor analogy. Extraterrestrials would still be consistent with the natural world and gods are of a yet unproven supernatural realm.

In regards to the rest of your first post, I've already explained to you why I do what I do and you seemed quite accepting of my reasoning at the time.

As for your engineering analogy… I mean… wow, just wow! Sometimes it’s as though you guys hand our rebuttals to us on plates or slap targets on your foreheads. Never before have I seen an analogy that was so spot-on in one way and so dead wrong in another.

The analogy was accurate in the sense that both engineers and theists conjure up something from nothing. The difference is, though, that engineers produce something that is real, tangible, measurable, demonstrable, verifiable and consistent with reality as we know it (“know it” being the operative words, not “believe it to be”).

Continued…