"type 1: intellegent person - someone who chooses not to believe because their intelligence allows them to see flaws in the religious institutions and ultimately resist God.  this does not mean that god doesn't exist, it just a simple human rejection of god with logic as the conduit."

except there are many geniuses that believe there is a God

"The point is that intelligent people use logic to dismiss the existence of God"

except i showed that intelligent people that use logic dont dismiss the existence of God...

"
Avogadro, and I'm not trying to offend you, but it seems to me that you just find something, not quite on point and try to shift the discussion in a different way as to not have to answer a difficult question"

what difficult question have i tried to avoid? im not aware of any, theres a couple stupid posts by damon or calus that are based off of generalizations or childish misinterpretations that i didnt deem worth responding to and anyone whose opinion i would value on the matter would deem the same, is that what you are referring to? its pretty pointless telling a arrogant atheist that consider religious people morons that his ideas about what religion is, is wrong.

This is exactly what I mean about avoiding issues.  How about the initial question posed in this topic?  If you have answered it and I missed it, I apologize, but judging from the fact that most people have alluded to the question not being answered I'm guessing it wasn't.

Can you not accept that people use logic to dismiss God?  Is that what this is about?   I'm making no judgments on whether or not they are correct, its just the tools they use.  Yes, there are people that use logic to accept God as well.   Again, not the point and off topic.

I'll say it again.  Ehawk gave you reasons why people reject the existence of God.  These are not blanket, catch-alls.  This is not meant for everyone that falls into these categories, but every ATHEIST that falls into those categories..  A better question to ask is why does Ehawk believe that people of higher intelligence question the existence of God more than people of lower intelligence.  I'm sure Ehawk will retort that people capable of higher forms of though will be less likely to "follow the flock" and research religion on their own.  Yes, this sort of soul searching may lead to God, but it can just as often lead to Atheism.  It did so in my case.  I was one of those angry Atheists that would yet at people for going to church.  I would make fun of people for their religion.  One day I had a thought.  "How do I know there isn't a God."  The answer is I don't.  If I don't know I'm right, I have to allow for the chance that other people are right.  What if all faiths are right.  The answer is we just don't know ... no one does.  Not you, not me, not your priest, not your rabbi, not your Imam, not the Pope ... NO ONE.

So I forced myself to reevaluate my beliefs, and I did.  I'm now the happy agnostic, living by the Golden Rule: Don't be a Dick.

"This is exactly what I mean about avoiding issues.  How about the initial question posed in this topic?  If you have answered it and I missed it, I apologize, but judging from the fact that most people have alluded to the question not being answered I'm guessing it wasn't."

i answered it as soon as the OPer clarified whether it was addressed at me or atheists... it did go largely ignored though

"
Can you not accept that people use logic to dismiss God? "

people can use faulty logic to disprove anything; i dont accept intelligence being a cause for the dismissal as God, after all there are/have been many great minds that were religious...

how do i know what is faulty logic?

i dug up answer for you. he asked me what is the reason people are atheist, i responded:

"there isnt a single reason...  the quote you gave was simply pointing out that the difference between an atheists and  christians is not "intelligence, IQ, education, or ability to think for yourself"

i dont support generalizations and im not gonna make a generalization about what atheists are...

I didn't ask if you knew the difference between sound logic and Faulty logic in general, I can tell that you do.  Let me ask it in a different manner.

If some one rejects God due to their own research using logic that works for them,are they using faulty logic?  Is your faith so strong that you see anyone rejecting God as illogical?

you do not accept "inteligence" to be a reason why someone would reject God? right?

well i can easily say: i dont accept "faith" as to be a reason to accept God.

there, i've just used logic!

my answer was not how to tell the diference between sound and faulty logic in general, its how i can be quite comfortable that there isnt a chain of logic that dismisses religion...

i think logically you cant deduce whether there is or isnt a God.  If some no name tries to do so, there is over a 99% chance they are wrong. are there intelligent people that dont believe in a God? yes. its similar to food. some people prefer vanilla ice cream and some like chocolate; you cant logically conclude one is better then the other. sure someone raised by a parent that prefers one has a tendency to like that one over the other, but that doesnt make it less valid and there are plenty of people raised in a household of vanilla lovers that prefer chocolate..

i think you missed the message.

the true meaning as i understand is, God can exist or God cant exist.  but whether or not, humans are only observers, it is not our place to question something in which there's no answer.  we humans are go on our merry way, and we cannot proove if god exist just as much as we cant proove he is false, bottom line. 

but since we cannot answer, we speculate what the answers might be, this is the human condition.  we speculate using a combination of logic, personal belief and virtue, until we ultimately have our defined personalities.  This is why its so hard for any debate of which there is no clear distinctive answer, will seem as if there is no merit.

so it is important for everyone to realize, that this debate in particular is challenging on both sides.  Our distint piont of veiws vary so much and our only passion in this topic stems from our inner beliefs, which cannot be changed, no matter what we say. therefore, using "logic" i can say ...   Topic=Redundant

Mehh fine... lets get all serious and logical, shall we ?

Accepted assumptions about the God :

- He is perfect
- He is eternal (can se and be past and future along with now)
- He is all-powerful and he is worthy of worship
- All-good, all-loving and the essence is justice.

Also one must believe from the bible, that what the God originally created was perfect, and that humans tainted it. Therefore we must suffer in this world, until we pray and openly ask for foregiveness. Then we shall go to heaven and not hell when we die. All humans who does not ask for foregiveness shall go to hell and burn for all eternity.

---

Lets first argue on Gods perfection.

Accepting the previously stated assumptions, God at some period of time created everything.

Why ?

There is no reason a perfect entity would feel the need to create, seeing at is it already complete. A god that is perfect would therefore do nothing apart from simply existing.

***For this reason there cannot be a perfect creating God.***

We can bring this further...

Lets say God did create everything, if so and Humans were the prime creation, seeing as we were created and his image and were given a choice. In the image of a perfect god, nothing can be imperfect, so why did the perfect human betray Gods trust and will, and disobey him ? A perfect god could not logically create anything imperfect without itself being imperfect.

***For this reason there cannot be a perfect creating god.***

Some state that God wanted humanity given free will, and in this that humans are to blame for their own imperfection.
That god did not at all want mindless perfect happy droids.

This simply cannot be truth. If God is perfect, and omnipotent, he could make it so that mankind could choose only good options, and still be happy. Therefore God is to blame for humanity's imperfections.

If God, the perfect being, has free will, yet he creates imperfect humans in his own image, he logically cannot be perfect.

***For this reason there cannot be a perfect creating god***

The most solid argument yet is our framework for existence...our planet. Its in constant danger, be it meteors, pollution, global warming, nuclear warheads, diseases, wars..and so on....why create things that would evolve with natural selection, when he could have created a perfect nature from the get-go ? A nature that could not be messed with ?
I mean to damn self-centered warmongering humans to eternal flames is one thing, but when the very framework of our existence, this being our planet, being in constant hazard ? Wouldnt this be to damn humans that have not yet done anything ?

A perfect creating god could not create a self-destructive biosphere, as there would be no point to his creation

***For this reason there cannot be a perfect creating god***

---

~Then lets take a look at his eternality.

First of all, everything in the universe has a timeframe. Where is God on this timeframe and who put him there. If He always has been, why did he start creating when he did ? Was he bored ? Lonely ? If he has always been, why have not we, and our planet always been ? What changed to make him need us meat-puppets ?

This is of course far off of God's rules of existance. To need, to get bored, to get lonely, he'd need not to be perfect.
And if he is eternally not-perfect, he is eternally not God.

---

~He is all-powerful and deserves worship

Fine...lets experiment, shall we....

1. Go to your room/church/sit right where you are...
2. Pray to him. Tell him "if you want my worship give me solid proof of your existance within a week, so that I may show off this guy on IC, and have him shut his mouth about you."
3. If you get this evidence, take pictures and post a linky so I may see it.

If not...

One can then safely assume any of these two things :

1. He does not want to prove his existence to you.
2. He cannot prove his existence to you.

If 1. he is not worthy of worship, if 2. He is not all-powerful OR worthy of worship.

A god not worthy of worship is no god at all, and a god not all-powerful is not THE god at all.

***For this reason God cannot be worthy of worship and therefore is no god***

--

~He is all good, all loving and the essence of justice

Oh really ? Yet in his own image he creates human beings, being his prime creation ?

If eternal he knows all that is going to happen, all wars, all murders, all child-rapes, all adult-rapes, all torture, all diseases, all car accidents, all kidnappings, all terrorist acts....and so on...

Can an all-good God create so much evil ? Can an all-good God create a prime creation in his own image, knowing it will suffer through all this evil ? Is this all-good ?

If evil, is hell, satan and demons, did God not create all this ? Didnt God create everything ? Did an all-good god create the essence of what is evil ? How can this be ?

It is justice for an all-good god to put humans into a world knowing about all the evil they will swim in and very well might drown in?

Is it all-loving to send people to the eternal flames of hell ? ETERNAL, FLAMES, HELL !

***With this God cannot be all-good, all-loving and the essence of justice***

--

~God is all-knowing

A god that knows the future, is powerless to change it. Therefore he either is not all-powerful or he is not all-knowing.
Take your pick...

--

What I have offered is just the logical flaws of God himself... how can I believe in this god ? Why should I pray to him ?
It is just not logically defendable.

avogadro, why do you believe in God?  I mean, how are you so sure there is a God?

I'm asking out of pure curiosity.  You certainly are determined, and I'm wondering where that determination comes from. 

If you don't want to answer, I don't blame you.  Some people may take your thoughts and reasons the wrong way and post ridiculous things.  Unlike some others here, I'm not trying to prove to you there isn't a God, it can't be done, I just want to know if you accept the possibility that there is no God.

So would you state then logically you can deduce that there is a God?

There is pretty much the same amount of evidence stating there is a God and stating there isn't a God. (read: Virtually None)  So for one statement to be true, the other should be as well.  Otherwise you're arguing beliefs as logic.