:
That's the stupidest argument I've ever heard, especialy coming from the athiest side.
1. The church indeed says that god should be a matter of faith and not of proof. I guess that's why they put Intelligent Design in science books...
2. You can believe in something without proof, but not the other way around. You can't disbelieve something that is proven... Then again, christianity has been doing a great job at that so far so I might be wrong.
3. The bible is a book which we don't even know to be authentic. For all we know it's a same kind of story as the three little pigs or little red riding hood. For all we know it was an ancient fairy tale and some idiot started to believe it.
4. If any miracles have ever happened (unexplainable things have happened, yes, but that doesn't automaticaly make it a miracle) then isn't god the only one who could have performed them? No points for the church.
5. And that last argument from the athiests is so stupid that I'm not even going to contest it. It's basicaly like saying that god does exist only they don't realize it...
|
I'm not saying it's my personal argument, just one that is out there. The Church say proof denies faith, yet they constantly talk of God's miracles which, if they were miracles, are proof of his existence, so either they're contradicting themselves or are saying the miracles weren't really divine (Not explicitly, more through the fact that they preach the miracles yet claim to not preach proof of God). That may not make much sense, but I've heard that explanation-thing said quite a bit.