Although I cannot say for certain it hasn’t happened I have never witnessed a person change their beliefs about God one way or the other in the course of one of these blog exchanges. What I have seen many times is that people change their beliefs about each other. They come away with their primary viewpoints unchanged, but their negative misconceptions, stereotypes and bigotries about the other group are swept away. That, in my view is the most important effect of these discussions. Free of their mutual loathing and mistrust, people of disparate beliefs can work together for common goals on issues that are important to all of them.

I must leave this place for the time being. I wish you much learning in your travels.

Many believers like to surround themselves with other believers for the reassurance they get from the group that their shared belief is correct.

This is unfortunatly true in many cases. Though I believe that by participating in this dialogue it shows that this is not the case for me. We should all be willing to confront others of dissimilar beliefs in an honest attempt to find truth. We should never fear truth.

“And if there are Christians out there who would like to point out that the “crazy” beliefs aren’t representative of true Christianity, let them do it, too. I would imagine the latter group has much more of an uphill battle.”

The implication here is that “belief” in God is crazy and difficult to defend, implying that Athiests have no trouble defending their own belief system. Ouch! I dont’ see that as open minded nor fair. Belief is held on a variety of levels. There is indepth belief and functional belief. As a theologian it is necessary to have both an indepth and a functional belief. Whereas for a common person functional is perfectly fine. Very few of you can describe the “inner workings” of the law of gravity not in finite detail. You have a functional knowledge and this is good enough. To intentionally confuse the two is intellectually dishonest.

olvlzl, no ism, no ist made some brilliant points and the majority of athiest cried foul. Now perhapse his tone was brisk or all business but to mock and impune him because you find his arguments “tiresome” is a bit childish. The topic of God isn’t “silly” that’s like saying: War is a silly thing. It may seem like it to those outside, but to those in the foxholes war doens’t seem all that silly. It’s deadly serious.

As to Dawkins: there are a lot of holes in his argument, lots. Where is his discussion concerning the assult on science by the existentionalist: Foucault, Derrea?
How has he taken Wiggettenstein into his work? What is the mechanism that drove the creation of DNA? (Contrary to the post that was given earlier life does not grow from less complicated to more complicate it goes the direct opposite. That’s called the 2nd Law of thermodynamics, of which the theory of evolution (macro evolution), directly contradicts.)

olvlzl I hate to say it was correct. Just like Richard Wade accused “I am not you” what is this site all about? It’s a place where like minded people congregate to congragulate each other on how “scientific”, “rational” and “free thinking” you all are.

I try not to have a motive, though I admit the art of persuasion interests me. I see it this way; If I experience something that is amazing, I will want to share it with my wife because I know it will give her joy. In the same way, I feel that I am aware of something that is truly amazing and I want to share it and for others to experience it.

Your motive of wanting to persuade is very transparent, and when you’re straight forward about it, it’s not objectionable. Since you like to double check your convictions, perhaps you should be concerned about two possible motives behind the motive: It is natural to want to share with others something that is joyful for you. That is a positive and healthy motive, and I’m sure you have it. The other one I suspect vaguely from other things you have said. Many believers like to surround themselves with other believers for the reassurance they get from the group that their shared belief is correct. The penguins huddled in the middle of the flock get more shelter from the antarctic wind than the ones out on the edge. The bigger the flock, the more penguins get the shelter. If you are troubled from time to time by gaps, thin spots or weaknesses in your belief, your other motive might be to keep building a bigger flock around you to shelter those spots from the chilling winds of doubt. That motive is not positive or healthy because it involves manipulating others for your own selfish purposes. I’m not saying for certain that motive is in you, but I have suspected it in many and I have seen it confirmed in several.

You wanted challenges to see if you’re authentic. Here’s one you might not have been expecting.

I’m not clear on this: If you’re already comfortable with your personal proof of your personal belief, then why the need for a test?

I am not going to claim that I have perfect faith and I always know for a fact that God exists. That would not be authentic. I often question my own faith and question what I have determined to be true. So I often try to objectively look for truth and, each time, I am lead back to the same conclusion that I had before. Again, this is why it is so important to have an objective (open minded) analysis. I need to make sure that what I believe is, in fact, what I believe and not what someone has spoon fed me. I understand that all this sounds ideal. I don’t want people to think that I have this false idea that I am able to be perfectly objective. I can’t. That is what makes it difficult but, as are all things, the more difficult they are, the more rewarding they are.

If your motive for inviting someone into your fortress is like the spider inviting the fly into his parlor, hoping that during their misguided attempt to prove false your belief they will find what you have found, don’t hold your breath waiting for anyone to even fall for that, let alone end up believing in what you believe. Slyness is not respectful of free will, something that you emphasize has great importance.

I try not to have a motive, though I admit the art of persuasion interests me. I see it this way; If I experience something that is amazing, I will want to share it with my wife because I know it will give her joy. In the same way, I feel that I am aware of something that is truly amazing and I want to share it and for others to experience it. All I can do is hope that people take the suggestion and hopefully they will have the same experience. So your comment regarding letting “people find their own paths” is valid, however, as I said before, I feel that I am aware of something amazing and I am inviting others to witness it only because I know it will give them joy.

Aside from the personal fulfilment one might feel by experiencing God, I also beleive that we are all part of the same body, trying to accomplish a task. For us to accomplish this task it would be best if we were working as a team. So I feel that we should collectively determine truth so that we can more efficiently accomplish the task. The task is simply to make sure that everyone feels loved and shares love. The question should be, what is Love? The answer to this question can only be answered by first answering the question, Is there a God?

Perhaps the best approach is to let people find their own paths.

Ah, so simple and yet so profound. Great advice…for anyone & everyone.

I’m not clear on this: If you’re already comfortable with your personal proof of your personal belief, then why the need for a test?

If your motive for inviting someone into your fortress is like the spider inviting the fly into his parlor, hoping that during their misguided attempt to prove false your belief they will find what you have found, don’t hold your breath waiting for anyone to even fall for that, let alone end up believing in what you believe. Slyness is not respectful of free will, something that you emphasize has great importance.

If you greatly value free will then if you have the desire to promote your belief in others, you need to be extremely careful not to become a clever “sheepherder” and inadvertently interfere with the free will of those you are engaging. Perhaps the best approach is to let people find their own paths.