[zenoo]

Compelling arguments of reason, you must be joking? A few links to Richard Dawkins garbage is hardly a compelling argument. Dawkins is indeed a smart and effective scientist, but his philosophy is terrible and he is in fact a laughing matter for most serious philosophers in academia.

Poster whose name starts with a D here actually did a pretty decent job of laying things out for you, but you just blew right by the important points and tried to flame back instead of responding carefully. You can't even stay on track in your own thread.

So check it out, heres some logical thought on the God matter, pretty much the stuff you can learn at a junior college. We exist, and we depend on contingent things in order to exist. My existence depends on my parents whose existence depends on,,back,,back we go to the starting point. All these contingent events seem to trace back, but endlessly and that is unsettling. If you believe as I do in the principle of sufficient reason (there is an explanation for everything basically) then you need to explain this contingent chain of events which is your existence. A contingent thing can never be the starting point. The only way to break this chain is to posit a necessary being, call it God, but this God hardly commits me to anything terrible Christians have done in the last 2000 years. Anyway, this is known as the cosmological argument and of course it is hardly airtight and has created a pretty interesting debate. Many brilliant people accepting this argument, others rejecting it.

Point is..belief in God is not fanatical or illogical. As you have already been told in this thread but failed to digest--people are illogical. Events such as the inquisition reflect how terrible humans can be, it has no bearing on the metaphysical objective truth of gods existence or non-existence.

If your beef is with Churches being abusive or intermingling with our government that is a legitimate gripe, but you arn't talking Philosophy now, just saying you don't like corruption.

Sit on a forum and regurgitate bullshit you youtubed from Richard Dawkins, a good scientist turned bad philosopher and claim all theists to be idiots while not offering any premised arguments is absurd. Atheists seem to think they are free from the burden of proof, but that just isn't so. If you make a positive empirical claim, then claim to have logic on your side, it is on you to show that--otherwise become agnostic and stop looking like a moron.