Multiflow wrote:I want to jump in the middle, but I am afraid of getting burned by BOTH sides. I have glanced through the thread, but as it is now over 400 pages ... sorry if I missed someone already talking about this.
The biggest problem I usually see in these (*cough*) discussions, is before you begin you should define what you talking about. Everyone assumes that we all agree on what a term means. We get some partial definitions as it goes along and people try to assert a point of view. I am not here at this point to disagree.
My point right now would be, 'What is a god?'
As the science based atheists have pointed out fairly well so far, there does not seem to be a personality to the universe. Because if you look at what Abrahamic religions try to describe as God, it is the universe. We are made of it, it surrounds us, it is everything. But it has no personality.
But to argue for the theists, is a cell in the body aware of our personality? And do you actively care about every cell in your body?
I guess I want to ask, besides personal satisfaction, why does it matter? Do you need a god for moral justification? Not really as most philosophers, atheists, and various other people can point out. Look at the world around you, ask yourself, why do I think this is right, or wrong. If as you age the only answer you have is because some one says so, see if you can find more to support it. If you cannot, you may find that there may be something else going on.
No. They really don't. I've read their books, god is only ever described as separate from, and sovereign over physical reality. Pantheism has no solid scriptural basis, and is a modern addition to monotheism. If you had argued Hinduism you might have had a point.
Cells in our body are not aware of anything in any meaningful sense.
It matters because truth is justified unto itself.
This last part is more or less the atheist proposition.