Counterfeits.

[37818]

. . . And why does one need to pray to an omniscient god anyway, seeing as he already knows what you want.

Interestingly, that is the argument against repetitious prayers.

Matthew 6:7-8,
. . . But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen [do]: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him. . . .

[Sparko]

The ever predictable response was: God always answers prayer but sometimes the answer is no. In short, no answer that "sincere prayer was reliable".

Except that was not my answer. That was YOUR answer. once again you burn straw men in order to feel like you have won. That is your biggest problem Tassman, you can never accept what someone says at face value, you have to invent their argument in your own head and then argue against that. It makes you look foolish.

[Sparko]

I admit that I find it difficult to consider the existence of a god to be a possibility, any god.

yeesh. Again, you ignore what anyone has said and invent something to argue against that nobody said. If Thor god of thunder came down and told me he was real and took me up to Olympus and introduced me to Odin and the others, I would believe in Thor.

[Sparko]

Seems a perfectly good reason to me. And why does one need to pray to an omniscient god anyway, seeing as he already knows what you want.

so let me ask you then,

If God answered your sincere prayers reliably (gave you what you asked for) would you believe in him then?

[37818]

Coherence and consistency in religious views of god's nature would help now - I see no reason to accept the existence of god if those promoting one can't even get their story straight - as would the physical evidence that should exist for events such as Noah's flood but doesn't. We'll see.

There are competing claims - counterfeits even.

On the flood among genuine Christians there is not a unified consensus whether that flood was global or local in scope. There is sediment evidence all over the world and on top of what are now some of the highest mountains. <from the global argument.>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedimentary_rock

http://www.nytimes.com/1987/03/12/us...-from-sea.html

[Sea of red]

Apparently you expect your debate partners to be mind-readers. That the word reliable was used to indicate that you weren't expecting God to bow to our every whim as long as we're sincere is hardly the first thing that comes to mind when I read your statement in post #156. But in any case, it doesn't change much, if at all. The notion that God not answering "sincere" prayers points to His non-existence is still a dumb idea. There are a variety of reasons why God won't answer prayer:

That's a wonderful straw-man you've built up there. I never proposed that if God failed to answer prayers that it would prove he didn't exist. What I actually said was "it would be a start" in establishing his existence. I do find the unreliability of prayer to be an absence of evidence that is consistent with God not existing, so I would make that argument.

[Roy]

yeesh. Again, you ignore what anyone has said and invent something to argue against that nobody said. If Thor god of thunder came down and told me he was real and took me up to Olympus and introduced me to Odin and the others, I would believe in Thor.

Ahem!

Thor and co. are Norse mythology; Mt Olympus is Greek. Zeus/Hera/Aphrodite/Mercury/Hephaestus etc. would be the ones shuttling you up Mt Olympus. Thor would take you over the Bifrost bridge or have you ride Sleipnir to Yggdrasil.

[Sparko]

Ahem!

Thor and co. are Norse mythology; Mt Olympus is Greek. Zeus/Hera/Aphrodite/Mercury/Hephaestus etc. would be the ones shuttling you up Mt Olympus. Thor would take you over the Bifrost bridge or have you ride Sleipnir to Yggdrasil.

ah ok, I am not up on all that stuff. But you get the point. Maybe I could hitch a ride with some cute Valkyrie.

[JonathanL]

Wow.

That's a wonderful straw-man you've built up there. I never proposed that if God failed to answer prayers that it would prove he didn't exist.

It's almost funny how you accuse me of making up a straw-man...

I never proposed that if God failed to answer prayers that it would prove he didn't exist.

...while managing to actually build a straw-man out of what I wrote (notice how I never once used to word "prove"*, or anything that comes even close to that word?)...

What I actually said was "it would be a start" in establishing his existence. I do find the unreliability of prayer to be an absence of evidence that is consistent with God not existing, so I would make that argument.

...and then in the very next breath you even admit that you do think "God not answering 'sincere' prayer points to His non-existence" (Which is equivalent to the claim "the unreliability of prayer [is] an absence of evidence that is consistent with God not existing").


*

For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

I specifically used the phrase points to instead of a stronger word to be clear I expected no such thing, but apparently that wasn't enough.

[Tassman]

yeesh. Again, you ignore what anyone has said and invent something to argue against that nobody said. If Thor god of thunder came down and told me he was real and took me up to Olympus and introduced me to Odin and the others, I would believe in Thor.

...and renounce Jesus. Really?

BTW Thor and Wotan live in Valhalla, not Mt Olympus. You're clearly not familiar with the glories of Wagner's Ring Cycle.

[Tassman]

so let me ask you then,

If God answered your sincere prayers reliably (gave you what you asked for) would you believe in him then?

Not when there exists the possibility of a natural explanation for the seemingly

[JonathanL]

Any natural explanation, no matter how improbable, is more likely than the god-did-it hypothesis.

This is an unsubstantiated assertion that has yet to be argued for successfully.

[Tassman]

This is an unsubstantiated assertion that has yet to be argued for successfully.

The improbability of miracles rests in their supernatural origin and this is an unsubstantiated assertion that has yet to be argued for successfully.

[Sparko]

...and renounce Jesus. Really?

BTW Thor and Wotan live in Valhalla, not Mt Olympus. You're clearly not familiar with the glories of Wagner's Ring Cycle.

I already said I was wrong about Olympus. sue me.

And yes, if Thor actually exists and Valhalla and Odin, I would have to admit that I was wrong about Jesus, because I don't think those two concepts of gods can exist in the same universe.

I also already said if someone could reliably show that Jesus did not rise from the dead I would admit that I am wrong in my faith and stop being a Christian.

I am at least honest in my beliefs. You apparently are not. You are a determined to be an atheist even in the face of actual proof as you have already admitted.

[Sparko]

Not when there exists the possibility of a natural explanation for the seemingly

When you reject any evidence, even God standing in front of you and proving he exists, there can't be anything that you would consider "credible" and no arguments left to present. You are a close-minded fool who is an atheist purely because you want to be, not because of evidence or lack of it. You've shown that over and over. You have what in the bible is called a reprobate mind.

Romans 1:18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

24Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

26For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

28And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 29Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 32Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.