mjpb,

Firstly, let’s be clear here that we are talking about “faith” in the religious sense: Belief for no good reason; belief against evidence to the contrary.

<<Both sides can and do exercise reason and get different conclusions.>>

Okay, so how would one exercise reason and come to the conclusion that the Christian god exists?

I’m genuinely interested because, of all my Christian friends, and all the posts on OLO and options I’ve read elsewhere, I’ve never seen it. In fact, I enjoy devoting my time to de-constructing and destroying this alleged 'reason'. So if you have something new, by all means, let me in on it.

Note that the fact that we are here is not evidence, and even if it were, it wouldn’t be evidence of the Christian god specifically.

<<Atheists are making the claim that there is no God. If it is in response to theists than they must have moved past a mere absence of belief. >>

The atheism of many atheists - including myself - has progressed past “mere absence of belief”, but that’s irrelevant as the original claim from which atheism as a response is derived is the original claim.

My point still stands.

<<How do you know that divine revelation hasn't created any real knowledge about reality?>>

Because practical knowledge (i.e. things we can objectively ‘know’- not just ‘believe’ - that we acquire from our day-to-day living) tells us otherwise.

Unless you think you’ve actually witnessed god or a real miracle?

<<If you really believe that no theists give the matter any rational thought you need to get out more.>>

Oh, I’ve gotten out a lot and I’ve seen a lot of the so-called “rational thought” that theists engage in and it all boils down to sophistry and obfuscation.

Feel free to challenge me with some of this rational thinking if you think I’m wrong.

Severin,

Re your post of Friday, 18 June 2010 9:58:38 AM

With respect I think you are missing an important point.

It is precisely because I fear the power of the CHRISTIAN churches that I think it important to combat any attempt to appease Islam.

How do you appease Islam without at the same time appeasing Christianity?

The above question is not rhetorical Severin. It goes to the heart of the matter.

How do you legislate to outlaw disrespect for Islam without re-introducing blasphemy laws?

Many of the Churches – this applies especially to the Church of England in the UK – are using Islam as a STALKING HORSE. Under the guise of preaching "love", "respect" and "tolerance" they are asking for laws that are more draconian than the blasphemy laws that were only repealed in 2008.

The front line in the never ending battle to keep religion at bay right now is in fighting any attempt to appease Islam. If we lose that battle we open the way for the Christian Churches to drag us kicking and screaming back to the dark ages.

Grateful wrote:

"I have replied … concerning their accusations of paedophilia against the Prophet (sic) and even myself, but it does not appear management sees any need to put a stop to this sort of hounding…"

LOL

Welcome to democracy and free speech. I'll give the Christian nutso's who post here credit for one thing. So far as I know they have not called on "the management" to censor posters who pillory mercilessly their beliefs and their persons.

More and more you reveal yourself as just another Muslim seeking to impose his beliefs on kafirs.

Foxy,

You seem to insist on reading into my posts things I never said.

I did NOT say Stalin was a bad man BECAUSE he was an atheist.

I said that non-theistic ideologies such as Stalinism could be just as loathsome as any theistic belief system. This is self-evidently true. I don’t see how any rational person could object to that statement.

In case anyone missed it, this was my earlier response to AGIR & AJ Phillips accusation that paedophilia is part of Islam:

Consult your wives, who will be able to explain to you a bit about irregularities in menstruation and menopause (http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=10&ID=4857&CATE=220). For example, my wife didn't have her period for at least 7 months after one of the pregnancies. In addition, in Islam the marriage can only be consummated after puberty. If married before puberty, the girl must remain with her parents. Is this 'primitive'? Yes, by our standards, but that was the norm in those days and obviously it is becoming increasing less common (in either Muslim or non-Muslim communities) as countries develop. The Shariah scholars obviously have had to lay done rulings cover all sorts of contingencies for innumerable societies over 1400 years. Is it paedophilia? Obviously not.

You just have to consult leading scholars of Islam, from the West, just to see how ludicrous this is. But if this is what people choose to believe, despite all the evidence to the contrary, then fundamentalism will have become the norm in Australia.

Pelican: regarding your curiosity (from Foxy's previous post) as how someone from an atheist background could become a believer. There was a need for foundation which i could not find in my upbringing and a sincere desire for the truth. I love truth and reason, which is what i believe i have found in Islam.

Salaams

Sorry mjpb,

I need to clarify/expand on a couple of points...

<<Atheists are making the claim that there is no God. If it is in response to theists than they must have moved past a mere absence of belief.>>

Whether or not some/many atheists make the claim that no gods exists is irrelevant as it is still only in response to the original claim that a god does exist.

If you are still unsure of what I mean here, then read through the following thread in which I had thoroughly explained this point to a couple of OLO theists who had a lot difficulty understanding this.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10176&page=0

<<How do you know that divine revelation hasn't created any real knowledge about reality?>>

I don't know.

But I believe with a high degree of certainty, and the practical knowledge I've acquired from my day-to-day living gives me sound objective reasoning to reach this high degree of certainly.

Yes grateful, and in case you missed it, my rebuttal can be found at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3729#90710

<<You just have to consult leading scholars of Islam, from the West, just to see how ludicrous this is.>>

If it takes consultation with “leading scholars of Islam” to see how ludicrous it is, then the Qur’an is not the word of any god. It also suggests that any consultation with these leading scholars would result in pure sophistry and obfuscation.

Otherwise, you’d be able to summarise it for us right now.

Dear Steven,

Kindly re-read my posts.

I wasn't objecting to that statement,
in fact I was confirming it.