Re: WHICH IS THE REAL GOD?

"Hatter" <Hatter23@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:33a55de2-b66a-4a03-8b2b-b4f90a3b7247@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Feb 26, 7:11 pm, "Pastor Frank" <P...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "Hatter" <Hatte...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:2ed838ff-5083-4ebc-b126-1ca9f20c091d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Feb 26, 8:04 am, "Pastor Frank" <P...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:>
"Hatter" 
> <Hatte...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
>news:5fa23798-e284-4f5e-9932-27a91403b014@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > >Logic, evidence, proof.
> > >Notice all three are missing from the argument for God.
> > >Hatter
>
> > God is the ideal of all ideals. What "logic, evidence and proof" do
you
> > want for believing in ideals? Or what ideal is the "real" ideal? The 
> > whole
> > argument makes no sense, unless the atheist tries to make a point,
that
> > the
> > invisible deity in the sky he imagines as being god, does not exist.
>
> I do not beleive that the Platoic Form "God" exists. Ideals are an
> abstract created by man, if you are arguing god is an abstract created
> by man, and therefore cannot predates man's concept of him, welcome to
> atheism
> Hatter
> --------------------
>
> Atheism is just another belief, or disbelief. All religion relies on the
> fact, that we don't know what is reality and what is illusion. Death may
> well be "going home" to a greater reality, such as heaven or hell, and
NOT
> oblivion as atheists assume.

That is still an argument from ignorance. No, we don't know. But I do
know something, people make crap up. So, if we should assume something
other than "nothing" we really should have evidence.
Hatter
----------------

    Thanks Hatter for not providing us with that "something other" to 
believe in, or we would all be convulsed with apoplectic laughter.