Re: Proof of God's existence? Why not evolution?

"Doug" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

in reply to...

> > If anyone has, it is you for making inaccurate
> > and illogical statements about his 'hypocrisy' when you
> > are preaching logic and scientific accuracy.
>
>
> Maybe you are new to alt.religion (if you are posting from here), but
> almost every theist starts a discussion with "god can not be understood".
> Yet they continue by making ludicrous statements that would require
> intimate knowledge of god.
>
> e.g. "God exists outside of time". You can only know this if you
understand
> god.
>
> [Saying god can not be understood, and then making declarative statements
> about god is hypocrisy].

I never have said that.  But I will admit that God is difficult to
understand.

>
> When an atheist attempts to make any conclusion about god the response is
> swift, "Your oppinon is worthless because you can not understand god".
> However theists can get away with saying anything (most of the time
> contradicting each other) because they are some how endowed with more
> knowledge about a supposedly unintelligible being, then non-believers.
>
> So, yes, mark is a hypocrite. Unless he admits that his statements about
> god are no more valid then mine.

I'm sure you have valid knowledge about God.  Everyone does.

>
> Otherwise he should not be making any conclusions about god, since he is
> supposed to be beyond human understanding.

There's lots known about God; and lots unknown.