Youth Minister has written us a few times.

Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

In response to the $666 challenge to give evidence for Jesus....

Quote:

From: Jay
Date: Jul 4, 2006 5:23 PM

Twenty five cents to any member of the Rational Response Squad who can prove the non-existence of God.

As I said before, you've already heard all of the Christian responses to these types of questions. God's existence is proven all around and even written on your own conscience whether you believe in Him or not.

So I'm waiting. Give me some proof against the existence of God.

Thanks for the bulletin and have a great Independence Day.

Jay

MY RESPONSE (short on time):

Quote:

Hey, did you give us your phone number yet for that on air debate you wanted?

Ok... on to your email...

1. I'll give you 26 cents if you can prove Snarfwidgets don't exist.

2. I don't assert a God can't exist, you assert Jesus Christi did. Your challenge is ridiculous in that sense.

3. The burden of proof is on he who alleges, I don't allege the non existence of all gods, you allege the the existence of Jesus. Again, like 2, challenge is ridiculous.

4. Still want to come on our radio show?

5. Just for kicks... define this "God" you want me to prove doesn't exist.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

His response is in quotes... mine is the bold text out of the quotes:

Quote:
The existence of God is obvious. The very existence of creation is proof of the existence of God. If you found a Rolex on the beach would you assume that the sand and sea worked together to form a perfectly working timepiece? Of course not. You would know that somewhere there was a watchmaker. The same is true for God and creation.

"The existence of the Snarfwidget is obvious. The very existence of creation is proof of the existence of Snarfwidgets. If you found a Rolex on the beach would you assume that the sand and sea worked together to form a perfectly working timepiece? Of course not. You would know that somewhere there was a watchmaker. The same is true for Snarfwidgets and creation."

Now that you know what you look like, I'll expand just slightly. To say that because there is a watch there must be a maker, taps into what we can empircally verify. I can go to a watch factory, I can talk to watch designers and makers, I can see plenty of proof that all watches as we know must have a maker. Now I ask you, please go ahead and show me a Galaxy manufacturer (God Inc.) go ahead and show me proof that all galaxies require creators, because as it stands we have none.

Quote:
You may not believe in the god you hear about from tv preachers and politicians but deep down you do believe in God.

"You may not believe in the Snarfwidgets that I speak of but deep down you do believe in Snarfwidgets."

Yes, this is how arrogant and out of tune YOU look.

Quote:
Therefore, the burden of proof is on you in denying His existence since the entire universe gives evidence against your argument.

No. The entire Universe is proof only that there is a Universe. If it's proof of God it is just as much proof of Snarfwidgets. The burden of proof is on the youth minister with the extraordinary claim, with no proof. That's you! Smiling

Quote:
On to the definition of God. I would say that God is the only being in the universe for whom there is no adequate definition. The very fact that God cannot be totally and adequately explained in a sentence or two is proof of His greatness.

I see it more as proof of his inadequacies... or maybe yours. You want me to disprove something that doesn't even have a definition? How bout you call me when you can define it and we'll work from there.

Quote:
I will say, of the person of God, that He is one diving being made up of three distinct yet co-equal and co-eternal persons. They are the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

I could say the same of the snarfwidgets. I'm assuming that wasn't your attempt at a definition since you just told me he can't be adequately defined. Or was it? That definition didn't tell me much, nor did it give me any good reason to believe in it.

Quote:
Although I have yet to mention anything about an on-air debate I would love the opportunity. Just tell me when and I'll send my number.

I thought you did. Yes, send me your number and we'll call you for our next airing. You available on Saturdays?

Quote:
Thanks so much for the opportunity to talk. I hope you have a great day.

Likewise.

- Sapient

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


hungoverharry
Posts: 9
Joined: 2006-06-28
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

I have a question.

Quote:
On to the definition of God. I would say that God is the only being in the universe for whom there is no adequate definition. The very fact that God cannot be totally and adequately explained in a sentence or two is proof of His greatness

if god is a "being" IN the universe then he isn?t supernatural right? So where does this leave us with his idea about god? That he is a being that exists in our natural universe?

So, if we were to take that statement then he cannot say that god is supernatural.

If god is of nature then can he be unknowable as well? Its a lot easier, to say the least, that a being that is supernatural is going to be unknowable.

Am I wrong?


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

hungoverharry wrote:
I have a question.

Quote:
On to the definition of God. I would say that God is the only being in the universe for whom there is no adequate definition. The very fact that God cannot be totally and adequately explained in a sentence or two is proof of His greatness

if god is a "being" IN the universe then he isn?t supernatural right? So where does this leave us with his idea about god? That he is a being that exists in our natural universe?

So, if we were to take that statement then he cannot say that god is supernatural.

If god is of nature then can he be unknowable as well? Its a lot easier, to say the least, that a being that is supernatural is going to be unknowable.

Am I wrong?

No, you're not wrong and excellent work. He'd probably defend by saying that he meant God is the only WORD in our universe that has no adequate definition. He exists outside of the Universe, however the word we use for him is in this Universe.

But kudos again.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Rigor_OMortis
Rigor_OMortis's picture
Posts: 557
Joined: 2006-06-18
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

My very short and simple reply to this guy:

"If all you say there is proof of ONE God existing... which one is it ? Is it Jehowah, or is it Allah, or is it Buddha, perhaps ? Which one is the right one ?"

Inquisition - "The flames are all long gone, but the pain lingers on..."
http://rigoromortis.blogspot.com/


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

Rigor_OMortis wrote:
Which one is the right one ?"

That's my point. Clearly it's the snarfwidget as he's done nothing to prove it's his particular diety over mine.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

Nut! Laughing out loud


peppermint
Superfan
peppermint's picture
Posts: 539
Joined: 2006-08-14
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

Great responses, Sapient.

now please preach us trash about the snarfwidgets so we can pay you a shitload of money to prepare for our ascension into snarfwidgetworld.

*Our world is far more complex than the rigid structure we want to assign to it, and we will probably never fully understand it.*

"Those believers who are sophisticated enough to understand the paradox have found exciting ways to bend logic into pretzel shapes in order to defend the indefensible." - Hamby


litterbug_kid
Posts: 6
Joined: 2006-07-04
User is offlineOffline
evil?

why would a minister want to win money when surely his supposed god says its the root of all evil
although yes he probably cares more about defending his 'god' but yeh we can't expect too much from these people Puzzled


peppermint
Superfan
peppermint's picture
Posts: 539
Joined: 2006-08-14
User is offlineOffline
Re: evil?

litterbug_kid wrote:
why would a minister want to win money when surely his supposed god says its the root of all evil Puzzled

Ahh yes, the ever-circling bitter irony that is Christianity.

*Our world is far more complex than the rigid structure we want to assign to it, and we will probably never fully understand it.*

"Those believers who are sophisticated enough to understand the paradox have found exciting ways to bend logic into pretzel shapes in order to defend the indefensible." - Hamby


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

AGAIN, HIS REPLY IS IN QUOTES. MINE IS IN BOLD OUTSIDE OF THE QUOTE BOXES.

Quote:
By your line of reasoning there is no such thing as the wind. I can't take you to a wind manufacturing company and I can't show you what it looks like. I can only show you the effects it has. What I would point to as the effects of God you may call mere chance or the works of the great Snarfwidget.

Nope, not true. We can monitor the effects of wind, we can't monitor the effects of God. What you would call the effects of God are completely unsubstantiated, and unfounded in reason and evidence. Anything that you would call the effect of God, is equally as likely the effects of the Snarfwidget. There is no greater chance or lesser chance that it's god over the snarfwidget or vice versa.

Quote:

Who am I to try and convince you of what I know to be true?

You're Jay the Youth Minister who wrote me trying to prove there was a god, by saying you can't disprove God. You don't "know" it to be true Jay, you "believe" it to be, anything else is completely dishonest, and said mostly to make you feel better in holding your irrational beliefs.

Quote:

Ultimately, that's up to the power of God in your life.

Is it? Because if so, surely God would've known what type of evidence I would need to believe in him. Surely this all powerful being would be capable of showing me. Surely he would know that I would not have enough evidence, and therefore would be committed to hell when I die. Surely he would know that this would negate any loving nature, someone might claim he had, and surely he would know that therefore his existence is an impossibilty. This of course, if we're talking about your Christian god, which you dishonestly claim to "know" exists.

Quote:
As to the following statement you made, "Yes, this is how arrogant and out of tune YOU look." I apologize if anything I said came across as arrogance. My aim is not to win a debate. I only want to share with you the love and reality of Jesus Christ.

If that's the case, which I don't believe it is, next time try asking me what I believe about something. Instead of telling me what you "know" I believe, maybe you should ask.

Quote:
While I do have substantial proof that I would love to share with you, I can only pray that God begins to work in your life.

You can only pray? Or are you capable of sharing the substantial proof? Make up your mind, which is it? I think you should do both, I think you'd have to. I'm curious, what could you tell God in a prayer, that he doesn't already know? Doesn't God already know if he is ever gonna "work in my life?"

Quote:
I would love to come on your show. Saturday will be a great time. Anytime before 10pm (UFC Pay Per View) is good for me.

You watch UFC? Wow, how very violent, and Old Testament of you. You're youth ministering doesn't get in the way of that?

Quote:
Just let me know when you plan on calling so I can be close to the phone. My number is listed below.

Thanks again for the response.

Jay
XXX-XXX-XXXX

Well I don't think it will be this Saturday, it'll probably be the 22nd or 29th. I'll let you know.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Nick
Posts: 187
Joined: 2006-08-01
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

Dude, don't diss the UFC. lol Laughing out loud


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

Nick_Poling wrote:
Dude, don't diss the UFC. lol :lol:

Why, you gonna send out Mr. Hurt on me? Sticking out tongue

lol, I bet our own Yellow#5 is a fan.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Yellow_Number_Five
atheistRRS Core MemberScientist
Yellow_Number_Five's picture
Posts: 1390
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

Sapient wrote:
Nick_Poling wrote:
Dude, don't diss the UFC. lol :lol:

Why, you gonna send out Mr. Hurt on me? Sticking out tongue

lol, I bet our own Yellow#5 is a fan.

Does somebody wanna wrassle? Laughing out loud

I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


JesusSaves
Theist
Posts: 108
Joined: 2006-06-25
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

I dislike wressling.. it is so gay.. in so many ways


Yellow_Number_Five
atheistRRS Core MemberScientist
Yellow_Number_Five's picture
Posts: 1390
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

Go figure....homophobia from the Christian.


GrimJesta
GrimJesta's picture
Posts: 152
Joined: 2006-06-21
User is offlineOffline
Re: evil?

litterbug_kid wrote:
why would a minister want to win money when surely his supposed god says its the root of all evil?

I can sort of answer this. I asked one of my theist homies about that $666 challenge. Now why would he want $666 if he's a Fundamentalist Christian? Simple really: the rest of the world isn't, and he would use that money for these things he calls "Manna Bags". They're basically large ziplock bags that contain soap, shaving cream, a disposeable razor, a toothbrush, toothpaste, etc., basically all the things that could make a homeless person's life a little bit better. But he doesn't do it through any organization, so he doesn't get this stuff for free. He does it out of his own living room, on his own, and he isn't a wealthy man.

So not every theist who would take the money plans on spending it on themselves (the root of evil isn't money, but the love of money, anyway, so taking money and being greedy and taking cash above all else are two different things).

So maybe this Minister is a hypocrite, but maybe he isn't. You never know what the money would go to. I don't see him partaking in the root of all evil if he goes out and buys food for a soup kitchen with the cash he'd get.

-=Grim=-

Edit: Anyone who doesn't believe in Snarfwidgets is going to burn in Hell. I have proof! Uh... Sapient's revelation is all the proof I need... Eye-wink

No Nyarlathotep, Know Peace.
Know Nyarlathotep, No Peace.


jester700
Posts: 105
Joined: 2006-06-27
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

JesusSaves wrote:
I dislike wressling.. it is so gay.. in so many ways

Who's more gay, the wrestler, or the wuss he chokes out in 15 seconds?


Holmes
Posts: 12
Joined: 2006-07-06
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

All this assumes the person who posted in question actually wants the cash, and is not simply engaging in their Mandate to Spread the Gospel. Strikes me making that open bet might have been tongue in cheek, but it will bring out Evangelists... Laughing out loud

So that being said, I think the real issue is something like this, correct:

1. The Theist, not necessarily Christian, could be a Muslim, a Jew (same thing as a Christian in my book) says the physical universe is proof of an Intelligent Creator.

2. The Atheist / Skeptic says 'nuh uh'.

I would tend to agree with The Atheist / Skeptic if it could be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Universe is effectively eternal, and has no beginning and no ending. Because then it's immaterial to argue whether or not it's 'created', correct? If it always existed.

But it didn't.... not at least by the Modern Hypothesis....which is the series of hypotheses and theories which, joined together, form the Grand Hypothesis of How We All Got Here.

So the Universe has an origin, correct?

What sparked that 'Big Bang' then? Was it an undirected force? Possibly.

But that still doesn't answer How there was there an infinitely small, infinitely dense conglomeration of mass in the first place?

And if it was stable..ergo, the forces holding it together prevented the situation of an outward expulsion of that matter, why then did it explode and become the Universe?

If it were unstable, how could it exist from eternity to the time of instability? Ergo, how could it not have itself 'had an origin?'

Can these questions be answered beyond simply the anthropic principle yet? (The anthropic principle being "Well, it does, and we're here to worry our little heads about it and stuff. Laughing out loud )

Scott Holmes


Yellow_Number_Five
atheistRRS Core MemberScientist
Yellow_Number_Five's picture
Posts: 1390
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

Yo, Holmes, read my take on the BB and the "origin" of the universe here, then get back to us.

http://www.rationalresponders.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=23&start=0

I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Holmes
Posts: 12
Joined: 2006-07-06
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

I'll tell ya what, I'll read your take on it if you can prove you're Steven Hawking. Otherwise, assume for sake of argument I've read "A Brief History of Time" and stuff. Laughing out loud

Bickering about hypotheses and the possible implications of a No Boundary Condition in Imaginary Time aside, let's get to the crux of the issue, shall we?

The bet is $666 that proof of the existence of the divinity of Christ can be provided, correct? Well, the blonde-haired blue eyed sandal wearing Hippie is telling me he knows the folks putting up the bet have a lot more money than that, and he's not a cheap stage magician, performing card tricks for tips. Laughing out loud

Not that he needs the money, but he points out that he does tend towards consistency, and that his previous statement about an old woman who gives all she has shows greater faith than the tithing Priests, he's gonna hold modern folks to similar standards.

p.s. I'm obviously kidding. The Hippie doesn't have blonde hair. Laughing out loud

Scott Holmes


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

Holmes wrote:
I'll tell ya what, I'll read your take on it if you can prove you're Steven Hawking. Otherwise, assume for sake of argument I've read "A Brief History of Time" and stuff. Laughing out loud

I don't get it. So what he's not Stephen Hawking, you don't read anything from anyone other than Stephen Hawking? Were you kidding?

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Yellow_Number_Five
atheistRRS Core MemberScientist
Yellow_Number_Five's picture
Posts: 1390
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

Holmes wrote:
I'll tell ya what, I'll read your take on it if you can prove you're Steven Hawking.

I'm actually James Hartle, now don't you feel foolish? :roll:

Whatever, thanks for simply blowing off what was constructive criticism of the prattle you posted that prompted my response.

Whenever you get around to being intellectually honest, be sure and let us all know.

Thanks in advance.

I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Holmes
Posts: 12
Joined: 2006-07-06
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

Question for youse; competely hypothetical, so take it for what it's worth.

1. Assume for a second God does reveal Hisself.
2. Assume there is no doubt in your mind that He is Him.
3. Assume He says that Christ is indeed His Son. And all that other rubbish about Him being the only path to Heaven is absolutely true.

Would it actually change your mind? Would you convert to Christianity? Or would it solidify your stance against it, for whatever theodistic reason (perhaps because he's so darned intolerant or something)

Because ultimately any proof of the Divinity of Christ will ultimately require Divine Intervention. Would it not?

We could go back and forth on scientific hypthoses and rhetoric all day, but I know that's not ultimately going to solve anything because a basic difference of perspective: I fail to see how whether the universe is eternal and without boundaries negates the concept of a God. Just because the universe 'doesn't need' a God doesn't mean he still doesn't exist, neh?

I am going out on a limb here, but isn't the converse is true of your position, correct? It seems like that's always the breakdown point in the dialectic; the point of no commonality.

So...sans such Divine Intervention, I fail to see how 'the existence of God, and the nature of Christ, ergo which religion is right anyways' can be proved. I've got me a Bible that tells me as much. Laughing out loud

But such revelation does an individual absolutely no good if they won't even accept it, due to whatever preconceived notions/sand bagging is in place. It doesn't make for good science either. That's why I like - and respect - Hawking; the man bets against his own hypotheses (except for the one about time travel). Ya can't help but respect that kind of implicit openmindedness and ability to reexamine his own pet theories.

So question: is this a serious test, or is the results predetermined if they don't fit The Accepted Hypothesis and or a George Burns view of God?

Scott Holmes


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7525
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

Holmes wrote:
Question for youse; competely hypothetical, so take it for what it's worth.

1. Assume for a second God does reveal Hisself.
2. Assume there is no doubt in your mind that He is Him.
3. Assume He says that Christ is indeed His Son. And all that other rubbish about Him being the only path to Heaven is absolutely true.

Would it actually change your mind? Would you convert to Christianity?

It always amazes me when this question is asked. Of course we'd be Christians!!! This doesn't mean we wouldn't have all sorts of other problems. Like for example, knowing that God is real, knowing how much torture and pain he is responsible for yet, having to believe in him as we have proper evidence. I know of nobody on Earth that has evidence of God, and refuses it... no matter how many times certain Christians arrogantly claim that is the case. But yes... we'd be Christian, and I'm extremely insulted you'd even think to ask that question.

Quote:
Because ultimately any proof of the Divinity of Christ will ultimately require Divine Intervention. Would it not?

If the Christian God existed, everything that would happen would be divine intervention.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Holmes
Posts: 12
Joined: 2006-07-06
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

Would they? So folks who have problems with different parts of the Bible actually convert, despite the fact that aspects of their life are condemned. I don't believe it. It is not human nature to accept criticism well; it's human nature to self justify and evade. Otherwise, nobody would ever claim themselves 'innocent' in court trials... Laughing out loud

The Bible doesn't 'believe' it, either, assuming a similar scenario. God drowns the Egyptian Army in an inch of water while following the people of Israel in a flaming cloud...quite dramatic visible manifestations, and yet they STILL build a Golden Calf and worship it.

Not necessarily. An omnisicent God doesn't mean always interacting with the Creation. Miracles aren't that common, even Biblically speaking. Miracles are simply God acting on Creation, correct?

Even the Enlightenment Deists believed in an Omnipotent Deity who created a universe that didn't need his continued personal involvement in the mechanics of it.

Scott Holmes


HealingBlight
HealingBlight's picture
Posts: 256
Joined: 2006-04-13
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

Holmes wrote:
1. Assume for a second God does reveal Hisself.

A being may reveal itself, and I may see it, and it may claim to be many things, but my god, that?s a power only I may wield, unless they manipulate my mind, which is possible, but that wouldn?t be me.

Holmes wrote:
2. Assume there is no doubt in your mind that He is Him.

How on earth it has a gender, and I guess if it was a god-sized penis, I would say what was revealed was a he. Again, I'm the one who assigns god status around here.

Holmes wrote:
3. Assume He says that Christ is indeed His Son. And all that other rubbish about Him being the only path to Heaven is absolutely true.

I would doubt it, probably look for evidence.

Holmes wrote:
Would it actually change your mind? Would you convert to Christianity?

I would not buckle my knee to such a monster, my flesh would burn and my body broken for doing such until I do, for I am only human.
So, yes, I guess I would, but I have denied the existence holy spirit, so I wont be getting any rest from the torture.

(Yay, 100 posts)

-----------------------
I'll get back to you when I think of something worthwhile to say.


Danhalen
Posts: 10
Joined: 2006-07-06
User is offlineOffline
Youth Minister has written us a few times.

Holmes wrote:
Question for youse; competely hypothetical, so take it for what it's worth.

1. Assume for a second God does reveal Hisself.
2. Assume there is no doubt in your mind that He is Him.
3. Assume He says that Christ is indeed His Son. And all that other rubbish about Him being the only path to Heaven is absolutely true.

Would it actually change your mind? Would you convert to Christianity? Or would it solidify your stance against it, for whatever theodistic reason (perhaps because he's so darned intolerant or something)

Assuming your hypothetical, absolutely. If (insert name of deity here)________ reveals itself to me, and I had no doubt about it (and all the information it gave me), I would have to believe in it. I cannot willfully deny something I have no doubt is true.

Consider this, you cannot choose what you believe. I can no more choose to disbelieve I am male than I can choose to believe anything for which there is no compelling reason to believe in it. At this very moment, I believe I am sitting on the back steps of my house typing a response to you, because the evidence clearly points to that fact. I cannot simply choose to believe I am sitting in your bedroom verbally discussing this issue with you. If I could choose to believe that, you would believe I am insane (with compelling evidence to back up your belief).

Quote:
Because ultimately any proof of the Divinity of Christ will ultimately require Divine Intervention. Would it not?
How does proof of anything require divine intervention? Proof is a logically or mathematically deduced formula (not to mention a term used to display alcohol content). Proof is something you can show to another person. If divine intervention is a prerequisite for proof of any deity, then it is only valid if the divine intervention is universally demonstrable. Furthermore, you cannot demonstrate evidence to support the validity of divine intervention without the presupposition of the divine.

Quote:
We could go back and forth on scientific hypthoses and rhetoric all day, but I know that's not ultimately going to solve anything because a basic difference of perspective: I fail to see how whether the universe is eternal and without boundaries negates the concept of a God. Just because the universe 'doesn't need' a God doesn't mean he still doesn't exist, neh?
The idea does not negate the possibility of any deity's existence. It does demonstrate deities are not necessary for the existence of the universe. The fact I fall into water every time I jump off a diving board does not negate the possibility I may someday rise up from the water. Statisitically speaking, the possibility is nil.

Quote:
I am going out on a limb here, but isn't the converse is true of your position, correct? It seems like that's always the breakdown point in the dialectic; the point of no commonality.
What seperates the two positions is the presupposition one must make to believe in the divine. You must presuppose divinity in order to believe it (since there is no proof of divinity). When one makes no such presupposition, one is led to where the evidence leads them.

Quote:
So...sans such Divine Intervention, I fail to see how 'the existence of God, and the nature of Christ, ergo which religion is right anyways' can be proved. I've got me a Bible that tells me as much. Laughing out loud
Since divine intervention cannot be demonstrated, the existence of a deity cannot be demonstrated (if divine intervention is a prerequisite).

Quote:
But such revelation does an individual absolutely no good if they won't even accept it, due to whatever preconceived notions/sand bagging is in place.
I call "bullshit." You have no idea how I, or any other human being, would react to divine revelation. I do not know how you can assume anyone will react to any given situation. If I can deny an event that actually occurs, then I am not a sane human being.

Quote:
It doesn't make for good science either. That's why I like - and respect - Hawking; the man bets against his own hypotheses (except for the one about time travel). Ya can't help but respect that kind of implicit openmindedness and ability to reexamine his own pet theories.
Yes, Hawking does follow the evidence where it leads him. He tries his best to not let presuppositions cloud his judgement.

Quote:
So question: is this a serious test, or is the results predetermined if they don't fit The Accepted Hypothesis and or a George Burns view of God?
I suggest you start demonstrating the veracity of divine revelation and find out.

Does it suck for you to know that God only loves you because you're afraid he'll kick your ass if you don't believe in him?