I agree. I wish peer opinions didn't matter at all. But it seems to.

How's your girl?

@CallMeDave Think you might have me mixed up, which girl?

And cheaper, but probably not as well turned out.

Hats off to you, you're one of a kind. Cheers and have a wonderful day !!!

And level 3 already

Glad you have not (yet?) been offended by anyone having a different perspective.

On these pages there is a great spectrum of tolerance for faith (belief without evidence asserted as fact (also the foundation of all religions including Christianity)) versus actual facts that can be demonstrated. The later of these examples if commonly referred to as reality. I consider a faith based assertion asserted as fact a dishonest premise. As I greatly value truth and honesty, when a theist uses faith to "find the Truth" I feel a great deal of pity for him or her and a great deal of disdain for the religion that defined faith as a reliable avenue to establish truth. Obviously, I fall on the atheist anti-theist spectrum of agnostic. Agnostic also includes theists so you will find others on these pages that support faith over facts.

Hope you enjoy your time here.

@NoMagicCookie I’m a pretty logical person actually. I don’t find myself in a position of using faith to find the truth. Not yet anyway. Everyone here has been very nice so far and I guess if there ever is a time that someone would decide to directly insult me over a difference of opinion and beliefs I just simply wouldn’t engage and wish them a good day. I may not be able to prove God exists but neither can you prove he doesn’t. You can’t peove a negative.

@Christiep77 Please correct me if you can demonstrate my assertion is not correct. Give me a non (faith based) defence of your religion. I do have an open mind and am willing to accept testable evidence to support the foundation of your Christian (or any other one of the thousands of other gods) actually exist in the real world (not imaginary or made up).

In other words, If you didn't use faith to find the "Truth" of your god being real, how have you determined your god is real?

Also, you are correct, you can't demonstrate a negative. That is why the burden of proof is on the person making the positive assertion. In your case, as identifying as a Christian, (you believe your Christian god is real) As an atheist, I do not accept your assertion. I do not need to disprove your god as this would be as futile as you trying to fore instance prove my invisible flying unicorn that orbits Mars and tells me what is a sin is not real. And yes, I find the Christian god as silly a story as any other god.

@NoMagicCookie my purpose in saying that was not prove you wrong and myself right. The purpose was to show, as far as I am conccerned, we are on level ground. I wouldn’t assume to come to a site like this and argue for my very different opinion and set of beleifs. That isn’t my intent or purpose here. I am not trying to change minds. Im trying to understand a vastly different point of view. Im not trying to prove anything to you. I wouldn’t do that.

That being said, I am not backing down from a debate with you. There are many personal, philosphical and tangible reasons I beleive in the existence of God. I think I misunderstood your statement about seeking truth. I don’t discount science or research as part of seeking truth. I don’t beleive that I have to be only a creationist for example. I beleive in the theory of evolution. I beleive the scientific theories on how we got here are valid and fact based and acceptable. I just also beleive in God. I, personally, do not think I have to adandon intelligent thought and logic in order to accept the existance of a higher power. There is one philopospher,and I am sorry the name escapes me that reasoned that because we can conceive of something, it must exist. Maybe Descartes? He gave the example that because we can conceive of a triangle, a triangle exists. Even if there were no triangles existing anywhere on earth, the mere fact that we can conceive of it, makes it true. I m sure that is a very basic explanation of that philosphy. I don’t have time to properly research it now, unfortunately.

Im feeling a bit like we are hijacking the orignal thread here but I am happy to continue a discussion with you in a private message or perhaps on another thread? I really don’t want to come across here as attacking this site, the people here or their beleifs.

@Christiep77 Thank your for you most polite reply that for the most part ignored my questions.

To begin with, I hardly think "we are on level ground" as my standards for accepting assertions of truth demand evidence. Saying "There are many personal, philosophical and tangible reasons" (to support your god assertion) does not answer my question to provide testable evidence to demonstrate your positive god assertion. As for "tangible" reasons to accept something as "truth". I have learned (through scientific methodology) to greatly question the "truth" value of "tangible" experiences. -I have two long stories that make this point-

You are correct in stating you do not have to abandon intelligent though and logic in order to accept the existence of a higher power. Only 92% of the members of the National Academy of Sciences reject a belief in God or higher power. Source (evolution-outreach)

However, you should realize to assert something without evidence (the Christian god is real) is a classical example of a faith claim.

I honestly expected you to discover your original (as identifying as a Christian (god is real)) assertion is, without testable evidence, based on "faith" and acknowledge your original "I don’t find myself in a position of using faith to find the truth" was, as I pointed out, not an accurate statement. Religious people often express pride for having "faith." If you own being a "Christian", you should also realize you also own "faith" as your method of finding the "Truth" of your Christian god.

Again, feel free to provide testable evidence of your Christian god's (not simply defining a higher power into existence that would also apply to my equally testable invisible unicorn but testable evidence that demonstrates your specific god actually exists in the physical (real world)) existence or recognize "faith" is the method you use to find the "Truth" of your god.

I would not worry about "Hijacking" a post as long passages are exceptionally easy to scroll past.

@NoMagicCookie I did explain that I have reasons that prove the existence of God to me. I offered another avenue of discussion for that as I m not sure this is the appropriate place.

Im perfectly fine with and accept your opinion that we are not on level ground. I will continue to beleive we are. I cannot prove to you there is a God and you cannot prove to me there is not. Not only can I not prove there is a God, I have no intention of trying. I never did. Not for anyone.

And also I fully explained that I misunderstood or think I misunderstood your statement about seeking truth. In application to my belief in God, of course its based on faith at the end. No matter what experiences and evidence and interactions I put out there, at the end of the day, bottom line its faith. Everyone knows that. Beleiver or not. I thought you were applying the use of God/faith to seek truth not the use of truth to seek God. Thus my science example. In your original sentence you did not specifiy using faith to find the truth of the existance of God. You simply referred to using faith to find the truth. I took that to mean a person who only relys on faith in every endevour. Rejects science and scientific method all together. (I.e. The ones who beleive the earth is only 5000 years old) I apparently misunderstood. My apologies.

@Christiep77 Thank you for revising your assertion that belief in god (I did specifically mention god several times) is based on faith.

" I did explain that I have reasons that prove the existence of God to me."
No. You listed three categories.

Your first category "personal", is completely undefined so I can only imagine it means: (because I personally feel like it)." (this is not an avenue to determine truth)

The second category "philosophical" offers no argument or references so I envision such train wrecks as the "cosmological argument", "watchmaker analogy", . . the list goes on. I have spent dozens of hours gravely finding multiple problems with each of those and many other (what I consider to be) failed attempts to define into existence any god, including the Christian god.

Your third category was "tangible" I am guessing this is also the source or inspiration of your first category. I have first hand witnessed "tangible evidence" errors in not correctly evaluating (supernatural?) phenomena and discovered, by using testable evidence to determine the (lack of) truth value of my "tangible" experience that my experience was completely a product of my imagination and did not present in the real world. I have witnessed several "tangible" errors with others and, as stated earlier, do not consider this, or anything based on "tangible evidence", (including "tangible" superstition (faith based claims)) a reliable path to finding truth.

You are clearly bright and If faith makes you happy, so be it. You are among the majority (religious) people in the United States.

I am glad you have the honesty and integrity to (if I am reading your last response correctly) recognize supernatural claims of your faith based religion, like all other faith based religions, are not supported by facts.

You are clearly a good person so enjoy your time here.