I never said you would like my evidence, in fact I posted directly that you would not, but the reasons you ignore it are not because it doesn't exist. In fact you should try actually pointing out why it should be rejected, if this was about reason and logic, just repeating over and over "no evidence" is tiring, not you particularly, you just wrote it once.

We just haven't had any so far...Your personal convictions and revelations, meaningful to you though they obviously are, are not convincing arguments for the existence of god or the veracity of the bible. 

well put,

Now you should point to the specific area that I displayed personal convictions left without arguments(convincing or otherwise) and perhaps state why they are not convincing, or why the arguments offered are not arguments.

So far from what I can see, you haven't posted any evidence whatsoever that god exists, more specifically your god, actually what you have posted can be used to prove ANY god of any religion or mythology true. Basically it comes down to I really really really want god to exist.

At least come up with some evidence that is not just merely rhetoric. I mean you have really nothing to back it up, truth? what sense? what is truth? Just perception isn't it? After all for life to originate it needs what? Well god isn't part of the truth then, because well it's been shown that life can arise naturally without any god interference.

Shit you haven't even proved that morals come from god, you haven't proved anything other than stating you really can't imagine life without god, that you really want god to exist, because you can't fathom otherwise. Sorry, it's simply a fact, there is ZERO evidence that your god exists, and is in the same realm of fairies, gnomes, Zeus, Leprechauns, Shiva, FSM, IPU, Cupid, etc, etc, etc, (lump this with all the other mythological creatures and stories). So far, you got squat other than wishful thinking and rhetoric.....which isn't much evidence really.

I'm not offended by your judgement of me.  Jesus supposedly said, "Judge not lest ye be judged."  I find that to be an inferior philosophy, though.  I much prefer Ayn Rand's "Judge and be prepared to be judged."  I have more respect for those who judge than for those who obey Jesus' instruction on such matters.

You wrote, "In fact a true believer knows that you are wicked, reprobate and depraved."  True believers have, by definition, turned their back on reason in favour of faith.  I am unconcerned about what such people think of me, since I value reason and reject faith.  However, the way most people (including Christians) respond to me in real life strongly indicates that I am liked and trusted (I live in a small town, which means that I am not anonymous in my day to day living).  People don't generally like and trust those whom they consider to be "wicked, reprobate and depraved".

Still, thank you for having the courage to judge me, despite that silly saying attributed to Jesus.

Is it better to live life with hope of being reunited with loved ones lost through death or without this hope?

You see as I posted earlier, society can exist, but can they persist and in persistence can they create actual individual health? The factors going into a society, much like a recipe, must be measured carefully. To reject a priori one aspect of a social factor seems to me at the very least an unhealthy technique for culture building.

Let me see...

Live life for as long as can knowing that I've helped my loved ones and others to the best of my abilities or live to screw them over figuring that I'll be able to pay them back in the afterlife of goodness and niceness that I have no proof exists (but my holy book tells me so)?

I've seen too much of the latter from those calling themselves Christians to not take the former. As I posted earlier, If you want to live a moral life - Read the Bible and do the opposite of what it says. That in itself will make you as moral as God. If you want to do better than that, look at what benefits you and others and strive for that.

"Truth" is whatever is necessary to keep a baby alive?

Babies die if you don't keep them alive?

Sure, if you don't take care of a baby, it'll die. I don't see how this is relevant. You said:

"As it stands I leave it at this, life cannot exist at all if no truth existed."

From analyzing your ill-defined, ridiculously ambiguous language, what you seem to be saying is that life cannot exist if it doesn't survive to reproduce. Alright, why didn't you just say that?

You mean we use our instincts and what we have learned about children during our lifetime?

Life is complex, and it exists?

Defines?

Reflects?

Nature of the truth?

We're what nature made us to be? 

So, this proves....what?

I didn't say I didn't like your evidence. I said you didn't have evidence. Where did you post it? Here?

"He exists because He must."

This is a naked assertion. Or, here?

"Like I said it is self evident truth."

This is another naked assertion, and it's an intellectual cop-out.  

I don't see any evidence. Tell me what I'm responding to, and I'll tell you why I don't accept it.

Correct. But length is secondary, health is primary. Being enslaved at length may be persistence, but does it have value to the individual? The individual is the measure not merely social continuation. WE are important because we each are.

Truth at its most fundamental is the basic needs for cohesion to manifest continuation, but with ourselves in the mix, we must include that also.

How the heck am I supposed to tell you what to respond to? Your the one choosing that. Sheesh I have to make you actually read my posts before responding or else I'm wrong?

You need to try harder, or not.... you choose.

I wonder what you could possibly mean by "verifiable". What I've written is what is, unless you have a particular post where you believe I wrote something that isn't, I can't see that your assertion here has any justification.

Would you accept as truth any believe which aided people in achieving long term healthy existence?

Tell me this, how can you lose something you never had in the first place?

Who gave christians the copyright on morals?

This is truly an argument based on ignorant superstition.

One of the most freeing moments of my own life, came at the age of 18 or so, when I finally let go of the fear of being persecuted by a vengeful God.

That was many years ago now, and if anything, it strengthened my moral view on many issues including attitudes to fellow humans. Why? because I was now responsible 100% for my own life and the decisions I made, not some fictitious deity.

As humans, at least the thinking type, we all have to live the rest of our lives with the choices we make. Is this not judgment enough. I believe that subscribing to the rules of some God, which are in essence only a transference of control by humans, cleverly disguised as Gods word, often leads to self righteousness. We have the choice not God.

For the lack of God's sake think for yourself! and question! and you will be free.

I was somewhat interested in this thread until  tr1nity used the term "fact" in regards to gods existence. I cannot grasp the ignorance or sheer dismissal of logic and rationality that would lead one to assert that it is a "fact" that god exists. It just comes across as one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. Blah.

Lol, how about like this:

"I proved that my worldview was correct in post #(xxx)."

Yes, but you keep saying that your worldview is 'self-evident' and 'proven.' I want to read where you showed that this was the case. Uuuhh, where is it?

No. I have to read your argument before I can respond to it.

Firstly, our society is not falling apart. There are fewer  violent crimes per capita in the United States today than ever in history. Your perception is indeed caused by the media. The media simply can report more violent crimes than ever before, because they've gotten much better at finding out where and when news is happening, and will get cameras and reporters on the scene very quickly -- and of course, violent crime makes for great television.

Secondly, god has not been "removed from the basics of community," at least in the United States. There are still plenty of religious people, and still plenty of communities centered around religion.

Thirdly, even if this were true, it would not be a problem. Here's why: do you follow every rule and law in the Bible? For instance, do you stone adulterers and burn homosexuals? Do you kill a woman for wearing mixed-fiber clothing? Do you stone people for working on Sundays? Do you avoid pork? Shellfish?

This idea is further extensible to the fact that there are many hundreds of religions, all with different moral rules. How do you decide which set of rules to follow without being completely arbitrary?

There are plenty of rules in the Bible which people do not follow. People pick and choose which ones to follow. How do we pick and choose which ones to follow? Surely, if the Bible were the ultimate arbiter of morality, then we should expect all people to follow its every word to the letter. Instead, people follow what rules they think are reasonable, and don't follow others. This implies that a sense of ethics external to the Bible, but not external to reason, must exist.

We can ask two questions: why does this external sense of morality exist? and, why should we follow it?

The first question may very well be answered by kin selection and group selection from biology. The second question has many sufficient answers in ethical philosophy.

From what standard do you derive the "despicability" of offering false hope? 

I never accept beliefs as truths.

When did your belief in Christianity become truth? That is, when did your faith become knowledge?

If you know Christianity is the truth and god is real, have you abandoned faith in those concepts?

I judge false hope to be despicable because I value truth.

Do you defend the offering of false hope?  If so, on what basis do you do so?

Lol...

Well shoot I don't know, don't you think  that it is remotely possible that "someone" will change the rules of the game "somewhere" ,as we are talking a society made up of more people than just you, that may interfere with your perceived derivitive whether its right or wrong?

"But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external or internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government that is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself."

qoute THE FEDERALIST PAPERS

Now why would that be a reflection on human nature that government must control itself? The answer is simple, human nature left to its own device will use power and influence to manipulate the circumstance to their personal benefit. The "A" morality of nature is further perverted by psychosis of every imagineable type. People without a standard from which to measure outside their own immediate interests would be left with anarchy....followed closely by tyranny and further slavery if not outright and total destruction.

This is the very "self evident" truth that built this country in the first place, the recognition of the fallen nature of man and the need for a civil society as the most fundamental to a healthy individual. Of course the entire effort driven by the simple fact that we are here and now. Now what?

Yes I have no faith in those concepts. Christianity is true because it is and God is real because He is.

Faith in the truth itself is that which carried me home only known by me because He spoke my name...and I heard.

hold these opinions but you should call them what they are.

Great now provide the evidence that they are true. Otherwise, any god of any religion that claims to be the true god or gods has the same weight as your claims, just because you close your eyes and mind and keep repeating it's true its true, doesn't make it true. Your like a little child with those claims. It's true because I want it to be true, and because I can't think of any way that it's can't be true, but I have no evidence it's true other than me saying it's true.

whooopee deeedooo.