I think I'd count in as atheistic, maybe a little agnostic. It's hard to draw a line.

I refuse to believe in the existance of a "supreme being" like a god. Often people praise Christianity for its humanitarian values. Those are great, should be considered as a direction for everyone, are found in many constitutions. But I dislike the God-Part.

The little beginning of my theory is mainly that everything is somehow connected. I don't think stuff is seperated and all-individual. Instead all there is only forms the representation of the world, a giant netting. Patterns occure in it that we see as reason, relation, examples of a higher explication. Maybe the "force" that causes this could be called "God".

As the human brain is layed out, there seem to be parts that are made to give us a feeling of religion. So perhaps people only "believe" because brains interpret these relations in that way. Maybe the very same area of my brain makes me think my ideas.

But the existance of an "über-person" like a God is often explained doesn't sound interesting to me.

riiight... guess not, I should have seen that...

John 3:16. About as well-known a verse as you can get, really
Also read John 3:17 - 21 for good measure

I don't have access to a copy of The Divine Fairytale, so you're going to have to quote whatever the hell that is supposed to be.

nonnus29: the author fit your definition of "deductive". The book is about how he turned from believer to skeptic, by attacking the evidence and finding it held up. Try reading it.

I don't understand how some always assume the Theists go the "inductive" route. You don't think it's even possible the facts back Christianity? If anything, I see that kind of thinking in the Evolutionist camp more than anywhere else.

Several dozen times, and not all in the same translation. I await a point (though I think Matthew's about to get a good reason to close this in the next few posts )

I can't help but be reminded of the "evidence" presented by Anselm of Canterbury (at least, I think it was him):

1) God is the greatest, best thing - superior to every other being in existence.
2) Existing is better than not existing.
3) Hence, God exists, or he wouldn't be the greatest, best thing.

See the flaw?

I agree with you there, I can't stand people that treat a theory (even if it has alot of data to back it up) like a belief.

Edit: in real life I never discuss religion or politics with people, I'm not change your mind and your not gonna change mine, so whats the point?

All scientific 'theory's are beliefs. Not one can be Unequivicably proven beyond belief. It's when you start 'preaching' your 'beliefs' (too much) that you become crazy.

Matthew must be in church this morning....;D

EDIT:

huh? So if you were a biologist would you be willing to be put on a cross for "evolution"?

OMG (<- irony in statement noted ), 23 is a Creationist?

I thought better of you

(and of course, in any Creationism debate I always post this)

Well, I've lived with a mormon, a muslim and 3 christians during my university years I also have an interest in religion.

I'm actually atheist, and I have to say that the people I know who are christians are some of the nicest people I've ever met. Still even though I am not atheist I do have a philosophy I beleive in. Not sure what the right term for that is..

Chris, you've interested me. I thought that the biblical idea of creation and the scientific idea of creation were in essence opposing and incompatible. What information do you have to suggest that this is not true?

Religion, Science, Philosophy, they are all fascinating!

I think I turned the last one into a flame war when someone said I didn't have the right to discuss it since I had a porno star (fully clothed) for my avatar. NOW that really ticked me off.