In fact, don't you find it a bit strange that at no time has any god instanced itself by materializing in some totally unambiguous and verifiable way.

I take a parallel position: I believe that the earth is flat, but I'm willing to change my mind as soon as you present me with evidence which is not written accounts, first-hand, photographic, video or theoretical, and doesn't come from an astronaut, astronomer or scientist of any kind.

It's very easy to "disprove" God's existence - or the earth's roundness - if you simply set your requirements for proof impossibly high. As a good example, refusing to believe in God unless he sits down and has a coffee at Starbucks with you. The same is true of your "group delusion" idea: dismissing the consensus opinion as a "delusion" because it's inconvenient, instead of accepting that it might be right in light of accepted evidence.

This doesn't bother me at all; you have a perfect right to think what you want. However, sooner or later you'll have to admit to yourself that your beliefs are unscientific, illogical and selective at best.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the basic hierarchy of science is more or less as follows:

fact
series of related facts
theory relating those facts
Law that is a proven relationship about those facts.

.

Well, except for thousands of miracles, fulfilled prophecies, historical accounts, eye-witness reports and documentation that is.

Of course it's very traditional for atheists to disregard that gigantic body of evidence or more or less flimsy grounds, by saying things like, "well that's all compiled by biased people" and "it's just christian propoganda".

It's very easy to "disprove" God's existence - or the earth's roundness - if you simply set your requirements for proof impossibly high. As a good example, refusing to believe in God unless he sits down and has a coffee at Starbucks with you. The same is true of your "group delusion" idea: dismissing the consensus opinion as a "delusion" because it's inconvenient, instead of accepting that it might be right in light of accepted evidence.

The same is true of your "group delusion" idea: dismissing the consensus opinion as a "delusion" because it's inconvenient, instead of accepting that it might be right in light of accepted evidence.

Again, "that gigantic body of evidence" isn't any kind of empirical or verifiably documented evidence. There simply is no verifiable instance of a god materializing and interacting in any concrete way with anyone.

Yes of course there is! Jesus' existence is exceptionally well documented, by christian and non-christian scholars alike. Numerous prophecies have been verifiably fulfilled, again according to data from non-christian scholars as well as christian ones.

In addition, there are large numbers of theoretical constructions which support His existence as completely and logically as you could possibly want. Theory, observation, data, eye-witness accounts, historical records. They're all there. What else are you looking for here?

That a human named Jesus or Elvis lived says nothing about the existence of any god - simply that some poor, well-meaning individual has been slandered, maligned, and manipulated by and endless parade of charlatons.

Again, concrete, verifiable instancings of god, hell any god, would do nicely, say (arbitrarily) anytime since 1960 until now. Again, has god appeard in a physical, concrete manifestation for you or anyone you know (or anyone they no)? Yes or no?

Why do Christians need to insist that God is real?

That a human named Jesus... lived says... - simply that some poor, well-meaning individual has been slandered, maligned, and manipulated by and endless parade of charlatons.

I say enjoy your faith and let me enjoy mine.

But that just isn't going to happen.

Any proof that you might need that atheists are not about to leave christians to their faith is right here in this thread.

Poor christians oppressed by atheist dogs, lol!

Evolution is not a fact because noone has ever observed evolution happening and probably never will because of our unbelievably short life spans.

Isn't it odd that when a christian talks about christianity you're all defensive and complaining about "a desire to control" and how christians are warmongers and zealots, and we should "leave you alone to enjoy your faith", but then when you talk about it christians have in your view no right to an opinion and should just shut up?

You are completely wrong. Please do a little research on this. Evolution (speciation and emergence on new phenotypes) has been directly observed in the laboratory and in the field.

Proseltyzing is NOT limited to voicing an opinion and you and I both know it.

Well it certainly bothers you. Given how sure you seem to be that God doesn't exist, it surprises me that you don't just ignore christians.

bumblie,

I strive to always be respectful of everyone's viewpoints regardless of how different they are from my own - so you would have to be REALLY pushy for me to do anything other than act friendly and/or oblivious.

However, I don't think that is what you are really asking.

Assuming what you really want to know is do you non-believers have the same beef with Islam that you do with Christianity (an exotic faith rather than one you are constantly surrounded by) then yes, I think Islam and Christianity have some of the same basic faults as formal religions. For that matter I'd like to include Atheists in that list because many that I have encountered are quite insistant that you view the world as they do.