Replies

Just saw from an earlier post that you are an atheist. Are you an atheist atheist, or an agnostic?

Sorry, but I think it is intellectually dishonest to be an atheist. Either you have no evidence or you have evidence. If there is no evidence, you go with agnosticism. You remain open. If have you evidence there is no God, then let me have it. I'd like to hear. If you can demonstrate that evidence beyond a shadow of a doubt, I will renounce my faith right here right now. Go for it. Otherwise, what gives with the atheism?

I can make an extremely compelling case for a Creator, and one that is completely consistent with the scientific evidence. But I am only willing to engage people who are sincerely interested in listening. I don't have time to play head games. But that means I listen closely and generously too.

For a different perspective, you might also consider doing some reading from an alternative point of view, and if you can debunk it from an atheist or agnostic perspective, then good for you. I'd like to hear your argument, in that case. I like to recommend Stephen M. Barr's "Modern Physics and Ancient Faith," because that book helped me synthesize a lot of ideas I had been working out, and ultimately led me back to a belief in God. It's very clear that, within the realm of physics, understanding God as the First Cause is the most parsimonious and sensible answer, when you consider the alternatives.

"Just saw from an earlier post that you are an atheist. Are you an atheist atheist, or an agnostic?"

atheist

"I think it is intellectually dishonest to be an atheist. Either you have no evidence or you have evidence."

I used to go by the agnostic label but I'm no more agnostic about the existence of god(s) then I am about Xenu or the Easter Bunny.

I doubt you would refer to yourself as agnostic regarding the existence of the Easter Bunny even though it is technically impossible to disprove his existence.

If there were compelling circumstantial evidence in favor of the existence of God (or even Xenu and the Easter Bunny for that matter) then I would be willing to shift my position back to agnostic in regards to those entities.

To hold on to an agnostic position in regards to one entity (say god) while positively affirming your disbelief in another (say the Easter Bunny) when both share a common degree of confirming evidence (read none) that is true intellectual dishonesty.

"I can make an extremely compelling case for a Creator, and one that is completely consistent with the scientific evidence. But I am only willing to engage people who are sincerely interested in listening. ..."

I appreciate your willingness but it was not my intention to convert anyone nor to enter into a lengthy debate for the sake of debate.

If you think you have a deal killer, that is, an irrefutable body of evidence that affirms the existence of whichever entity you want to argue in favor of I will give it an honest review.