Do you believe that 2007 will have the second coming of Jesus Christ?

[Ebowed]

However, if the statement is categorical, e.g. "We can't know", then proof is required of just why can't "we" know.

The burden of proof is on the person who says God exists.  RRB doesn't have to provide proof that God doesn't exist anymore than he has to provide proof that the Invisible Pink Unicorn doesn't exist.

[Ebowed]

Not really.  That would only be true if God not existing was by far the accepted "default" assertion that was supported by all the facts accumulated thus far.  The burden of proof is on whoever makes a statement that is not patently obvious or part of generally accepted truths.  I don't consider it obvious or self-evident that God does not exist.

But if I made a statement like "we cannot know whether or not the tooth fairy exists", no one would say well that's not self-evident, and here's a holy book that disagrees.  The only reason anyone treats the question of God any differently is because so many people believe in it.

[Ebowed]

Okay, well that puts us on the same page to some extent.

However, the introduction of a deity as a solution to the question of why we exist raises more questions than it answers.  Where is this deity, and why did it create the universe?  Given the infinite number of possibilities that arise from this, yes, it is true that we cannot conclusively rule out the existence of each and every possible supernatural creator.  The question of whether any sort of supernatural power(s) exist is essentially meaningless, because if they do exist, we have no idea of knowing what their qualities are and why they created us.

What we can discern is that if there is a deity, they a.) don't care about human affairs very much, as demonstrated by numerous factors (the incredible detail put into the millions of species that inhabit the earth as contrasted to the short timespan of human existence, the sheer size of the universe and the relative insignificance of the earth and even our solar system, and the existence of immense suffering and evil within the world), and thus b.) are not deserving of our worship, love, devotion, or admiration.

There is no difference in how an atheist, agnostic, and deist operate on a day-to-day basis.  The existence of a deity is a question of science, not of any personal importance, once religious worship has been removed from the equation.  It essentially comes down to a question of probability.  I agree that there is no reason to believe that, if there is a God, it is anything like the God of the Bible, which is largely created in man's image with unlimited supernatural powers thrown in for literary purposes.  I would go further and argue that the definition of God as accepted by mainstream Christianity is a paradox whose existence is entirely impossible.

[Ebowed]

I don't see why that makes the question meaningless.  It only means that you're not going to get very far if further questions are asked.

Well, not entirely meaningless.  Just futile, because it leaves too many questions open.

Or they just, really, really value free will.  Or any number of other possible explanations.  Don't these statements kind of run contrary to your assertion above that humans have no idea what the creator's qualities are, if such a thing exists?

I don't think free will explains any of my concerns adequately; in regards to the existence of evil and suffering in the world, some of it is out of our control.  A person who gets AIDS from a blood transfusion didn't use his free will to make any poor choices.  Maybe this just means that God values free will so much that our decisions (about who to have sex with and what protection to use) can just kill other people.  To me, it simply shows a lack of care on God's part.  If someone who gets AIDS from a blood transfusion is meant to be a sign to tell us to stop having unprotected sex, what value does it do to the person who got AIDS?  Not that, if this were the purpose of AIDS from blood transfusions, it has been very effective in stopping unprotected sex, given the way the AIDS rate has been soaring.  The idea that God could create a child simply so that it could be born with AIDS strikes me as morally repugnant.  The child (or the blood transfusion victim, both work) had no free will in the matter.

I make all of these statements on the hypothetical that God does indeed exist.  While it would be impossible to discern his purpose in creating the universe, I think it is incredibly unlikely that, if he exists, he cares about human affairs, based on the examples I have given.  Basically all of this is to say that if God exists, this raises far too many questions for us to even begin to consider the scientific ramifications of his existence.  But, based on pure speculation, it seems very unlikely that God cares about humans on anything more than a superficial level.  This video, IMO, displays why the idea that humans are the purpose of the universe's existence is so unlikely.  I realize that we can't ever conclusively rule out God's existence.  However, atheism is not only the belief that God doesn't exist (although it can be), but it is also better defined as the conscious absence of belief in any supernatural powers.  While the concept of deism is palatable to me, I see no reason to believe there is any deity that created the universe unless scientific evidence points towards it.

[Ebowed]

Jesus was crazy.  Or a rotten person who led people astray.

That's all you really needed to say, to hit the nail on the head as it were.

Well, I added something I think is essential.  A third option.  He was crazy.  Or insane.  Or He was precisely who He claimed to be.  )

He may have also been honestly mistaken.

[Ebowed]

So, who voted yes?

[Ebowed]

God is just because the book that is supposedly the word of God says God is just? I remind you that circular logic isn't very affective in real debates.

for someone who doesn't belief faith is logical, you sure spend a lot of time discussing religion

Should we consider that an ad hominem attack, or just yet another dodge of a valid point?

[Ebowed]

What is so amazing is not that God doesn't save everyone, but that He saves anyone at all.

Where do you get that from?

I know I'd be inclined to look the other way when it comes to all sorts of minor "sins", yet they are grounds for God to damn you to hell.