George,

Are you saying Dawkins and Sells are alike, except they have different causes?

What of the anthropolist whom classifies religions (including Christianity) as would an atomic chemist would assign characteristics to elements? Such a person has the religions figuratively on the table and sorts these faiths according some taxonomy in a fully detached manner. More detached than Dawkins or a theist.

O.

The difference between the followers of a priest and the followers of Dawkins are that the first want to believe and the second want to know.

So,Sellick, God is the Creator of the world,he is love so and and soforth.You Anglican Godbotherers have all the answers. After you have projected all your human values and concepts on him you feel comfortablein telling us your version of God and you think we should take you seriously.

Well,Pete, let me tell you something. No one knows who or what God is beause he is beyond language. He is not a human prototype writ large. He IS. No sub set can ever hope to assume the whole.
That is all we need to know. So dont sound so all-knowing and so smug. You are nowhere near the truth. Those who have had the experience through interiority preserve the blessing in sacred silence in humility. They wont sound off like some intellectual know-all.
Back to your Bible and enjoy your delusional opiate.We have nothing to learn from you.

socratease

Pray tell, what are these "logical problems" with insisting that God is the cause of the world?

God deniers have two choices. 1. Claim that the Universe has existed eternally. Or 2. Claim that the universe came from nothing.

With Christianity, the claim is, and always has been that God has always existed. So, what "logical problems" could this possibly entail that are not also entailed by arguing that the universe has always existed, or that it somehow came from absolute nothingness?

Candice you write

'Child killers are reviled today, so why not god?'

I take it you vehemently oppose the murder of unborn children.

Trav,

The difference is science endeavours to explain/know how the universe exists or may have always existed:

http://www.astrosociety.org/pubs/mercury/31_02/nothing.html

Just a working theory of course, above.

On the other hand, priests don't explain "how" god exists. If one put Zeus, Jesus or Diana into a particle accelerator, what would we learn? What predictions would clerics make? How is god fundamentally constitured? God "acts", herein, how does god transition - by what process?

Martins S,

Thank you for your reply. The existence of evil is a problem it seems even for a believer. Why god would create evil by proxy is a major issue.

Here's another one. Why does a supreme being require worship? A dire need for adulation is not consistent with a self-actualised personality or a sound ego.