Who made God?

Originally posted by dj2becker
As you are an atheist, I recon you believe in atheistic evolution?

I am an atheist. I believe in evolution.

But I repeat: there are many christians who believe in evolution. Evolution does not necessarily entail atheism.

Originally posted by rwingett
I am an atheist. I believe in evolution.

But I repeat: there are many christians who believe in evolution. Evolution does not necessarily entail atheism.

That's perfect. So are you willing to defend your atheistic standpoint?

Originally posted by rwingett
I am an atheist. I believe in evolution.

But I repeat: there are many christians who believe in evolution. Evolution does not necessarily entail atheism.

Firstly, do you believe that time, matter, and chance produced your brain?

Originally posted by dj2becker
That's perfect. So are you willing to defend your atheistic standpoint?

As atheism makes no claims, it has no 'standpoint' to defend. It is the christian who must defend his claim for the existence of god. If he cannot do so, the default position should be atheism.

Originally posted by dj2becker
Firstly, do you believe that time, matter, and chance produced your brain?

I believe the human brain evolved through naturalistic means. This is a topic Carl Sagan deals with in his book, The Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence. A very good book. I recommend it highly.

Originally posted by rwingett
I believe the human brain evolved through naturalistic means. This is a topic Carl Sagan deals with in his book, [b]The Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence. A very good book. I recommend it highly.[/b]

Please define 'naturalistic' as you view it.

Originally posted by dj2becker
Please define 'naturalistic' as you view it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalism_%28philosophy%29

Knock yourself out.

Edit: If that's too much reading for you, then here's a simpler definition from the dictionary:

Naturalism: 2: a theory denying that an event or object has a supernatural significance; specif: the doctrine that scientific laws are adequate to account for all phenomena.

Originally posted by rwingett
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalism_%28philosophy%29

Knock yourself out.

Edit: If that's too much reading for you, then here's a simpler definition from the dictionary:

Naturalism: 2: a theory denying that an event or object has a supernatural significance; specif: the doctrine that scientific laws are adequate to account for all phenomena.

I gather you believe in absolute truth?

If so, how is this possible within a naturalistic framework?

Originally posted by dj2becker
I gather you believe in absolute truth?

If so, how is this possible within a naturalistic framework?

2 + 2 = 4. Unless I'm mistaken, I believe that's an absolute truth. And a very natural one.

Originally posted by rwingett
2 + 2 = 4. Unless I'm mistaken, I believe that's an absolute truth. And a very natural one.

Fair enough.

Do you believe the statement "God does not exist" is an absolute truth?

Originally posted by dj2becker
Fair enough.

Do you believe the statement "God does not exist" is an absolute truth?

No. I have never made that claim.

I do not believe in god, but I freely admit I could be wrong.

Originally posted by rwingett
No. I have never made that claim.

I do not believe in god, but I freely admit I could be wrong.

Fair enough.

So what would you regard as evidence for God's existance?

Originally posted by dj2becker
Fair enough.

So what would you regard as evidence for God's existance?

I don't know. Some physical manifestation of god, who performed some miracle, I suppose. Make the Earth start rotating in the opposite direction, or make an extra moon pop into existence. That might suffice. You know, something big and showy. Not something pathetic and mundane, like an image of Jesus on a grilled cheese sandwich.

Originally posted by rwingett
I don't know. Some physical manifestation of god, who performed some miracle, I suppose. Make the Earth start rotating in the opposite direction, or make an extra moon pop into existence. That might suffice. You know, something big and showy. Not something pathetic and mundane, like an image of Jesus on a grilled cheese sandwich.

On what basis do you reject the historicity of Jesus Christ and the miracles he performed?

Originally posted by dj2becker
On what basis do you reject the historicity of Jesus Christ and the miracles he performed?

I see no evidence that he performed any miracles. We have only secondhand testimony from unreliable sources, written decades after Jesus' death.

I, myself, have seen no miracles.