First installment of Crazy Christians for 2013

A person who believes that God exist has faith in this belief even though proof or evidence is not needed.

A person who believes that God does not exist has faith in this belief even though proof or evidence is not needed.

Definition of faith as defined in the New World Dictionary Of The American Language Second College Edition:

1. Unquestioning belief that does not require proof or evidence. 2. Unquestioning belief in God, religious tenets, etc. 3. A religion or a system of religious beliefs. 4. Anything believed. 5. Complete trust, confidence, or reliance. 6. Allegiance to some person or thing; loyalty.

I' d say after looking at those definitions every single one of us regardless who we are have faith in something.

For the believers in the existence of God, they have faith that He exist.

For the non-believers in the existence of God, they have faith that He doesn't exist.

Have I left anything out?

 kittykat do those definitions agree with your own personal definition of "faith"?

Ktrain....The analogy of the print factory was given to give picture of the most unlikely odds that life could form by random chance....That's how absurd the odds are.

Faith is the belief in things unseen. we all exercise it everyday

Dirt, you don't have proof. That is a plain lie.

You make choices based on inductive reasoning, that is not proof.

The runners in the Boston marathon thought that it would be like every other marathon in Boston on this Patriots days.

If they had evidence or proof that a bomb would go off, would they have ran the marathon? Of course not. They used there evidences around them, ie, has anything ever happened on this day? Will there be police around? etc etc..

Well, guess what...

Using evidences around you to make inductive choices is NOT proof whether something will happen or not. You do not know. Instead you put faith into it.

That's reality

"One example of this would be the Argument from Evil, an atheological argument which proposes to prove that an omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent god cannot exist alongside a world like ours which has so much evil in it. If successful, such an argument would not disprove the existence of some other god; it would instead merely disprove the existence of any gods with a particular set of characteristics.

Obviously disproving a god requires an adequate description of what it is and what characteristics it has in order to determine either if there is a logical contradiction or if any testable implications hold true. Without a substantive explanation of just what this god is, how can there be a substantive claim that this god is? In order to reasonably claim that this god matters, the believer must have substantive information regarding its nature and characteristics; otherwise, there is no reason for anyone to care.

Claiming that atheists "cannot prove that God does not exist" often relies upon the misunderstanding that atheists claim "God does not exist" and should prove this. In reality, atheists merely fail to accept the theists' claim "God exists" and, hence, the initial burden of proof lies with the believer. If the believer is unable to provide good reason to accept the existence of their god, it is unreasonable to expect the atheist to construct a disproof of it - or even care much about the claim in the first place."

Ktrain. The problem of evil has been beaten to death over the centuries

Firstly, evil occurs in the world due to free will. That is our greatest gift given by God. We are given free will so that we can come to God freely.

Unfortunately, A side consequence of free will is evil acts performed by man.

In terms of the burden of proof, this is now a matter of semantics.

If I come out with , God does exist, then the burden is on me. But if I ask the question, what caused the universe, or what caused life or why is there something rather than nothing, then whatever answer the Atheist gives, they have the burden. Whatever answer the Theist gives, the burden rests with them. The only person who doesn't have the burden are Agnostics, who simply say, I don't know.

I have only been debating Atheists for a short time, but it is very easy to see how they continually switch between Atheism and Agnosticism.

Ktrain, the odds of winning powerball are no where near as bad as life forming by chance, no where near at all.

In regards to everyday life, this all forms part of our basic proper belief.

LOL, take it easy with me? LOL

No evidence of God?

So I suppose you have debunked Christianity, Jesus never existed, never was crucified, never rose, never performed miracles.

KK, the evidence is screaming at you in the face, if you put your head in the sand and close your eyes, it doesn't mean it does not exist.

I have put argument after argument, you , neither of you have debunked any argument, NOTHING.

The only thing I get is, "I don't know"

None of you have challenged my argument regarding the origins of the universe, fine tuning of the universe, the only answer I get is, the multiverse? How ironic, you say I don't have evidence, yet you quote the multiverse SMH

Again, Origins of the universe, fine tuning, Historicity of Christ....And all I get from you is multiverse, and I don't know.

Seriously, and I though Atheists are supposed to be the voice of reason...smh

Ktrain....

You say you would love to believe in the afterlife...Then what is stopping you? What is it exactly that stops you from believing?

What is contradictory of God? Specifically, what is it?

What is it about the bible that science refutes? Did they refute Jesus and what he did? As soon as I picked up the bible, I realised it wasn't a science text book, was never meant to be a science, was never intended to be a science book. The Bible is a collection of books, poems, legal and history. Not a science book.

Tell me, if I went to the local library and ripped a chapter from a book from the poetry section and then ripped a chapter fro the legal section, then a chapter from autobiography section, and I got all those chapters and put it together and I called it "Rostos' Book"...Would you read all the chapters all in the same way?

That's how it is meant to be read.

From my experience, people don't want to accept the bible simply because they don't want to be told what is right or wrong, they want to be there own God.

Why doesn't the quote function work for me?