Well maybe I’m getting a little frustrated here too. I don’t have the answers but I’m continually being asked to prove something that cannot be proved. I believe God loves everyone. Yes, I believe that! Yes, I believe some of you don’t want to believe in him and I understand why. I can’t change how much I love God and how much I wish you could all love him too, and I won’t stop feeling that way, no matter how silly or stupid or whatever it is you think I am. I’m trying to be as cool as I can here but I do feel I’m on my own in my beliefs (mostly) in this thread and I can’t help but feel a bit attacked as well.
dreamer: We’re not asking you to prove something that cannot be proven. (Well, I’m not, anyway.)
But we are asking for the evidence, which we can all examine (and which we nonbelievers are somehow ignoring), for:
(A) the existence of God, and
(B) the nature of God (e.g. God loves everyone, God sometimes intervenes in the physical universe in thus-and-such a way, etc.).
Note that the Bible, by itself, will not be considered evidence by most nonbelievers.
Then why do you continue making assertions? E.g. “I know God exists.” Call them beliefs and you won’t get much of the grief.
Nothing wrong with the first part, after all you did call it “your beliefs” however, in the face of the answers you’ve been given, it seems ermm… a bit arrogant to keep telling others that they are in essense, lying to themselves. Again, you can repeat that until you’re blue in the face, but in light of the myriad of answers given you, it makes no sense.
You seem to be saying that regardless of any evidence or logic presented to contradict your beliefs, you can’t change them as you’re powerless to make up your own mind?
Do you realize how bizarre that sounds?
Seems to me, everyone else here is trying to be just as cool in their responses. But the communication is happening on two diffrent levels. You’re being asked to use logic but you’re relying mostly on emotion and faith.
Not that there’s anything intrinsically wrong with that, but it hardly makes for a debatable viewpoint. You’d need to study both, your faith and the arguments against it, to be able to do so.
Hope that helps you put things in perspective.
OK here’s the important distinction.
Your statement above is fine. You can’t prove God exists, but you believe in Him.
As I already posted:
“We here can respect your personal belief in God.”
Unfortunately you implied the opposite earlier (bolding mine):
And as I said “What we don’t like is when you claim there is evidence we can all examine, and that we are somehow ignoring it.”
Firstly you are a decent person who wants to share your happiness with all of us.
Thank you for that. 
Secondly you are making a small but significant mistake. I don’t think there is a single person here who doesn’t want to believe in God.
What you have are a lot of people who are interested discovering the truth, using evidence.
Unfortunately there is no physical evidence of God.
Now your testimony is worth listening to.
And if every believer said exactly the same thing, it would be significant.
However, as I posted, there is a lot of disagreement. (Did you recognise the different religions and sects in my examples?)
As I said, I went to church till I was 14. I still discuss religion with my School Chaplain, as well as on this board.
I just don’t believe in anything without evidence. (I point out that if God exists, He made me that way!)
I am very happy to discuss things with you.
You have good manners, proper spelling / grammar and a different viewpoint which I would like to learn more about.
But I want both of us to be accurate.
You have a firm belief, but no evidence. OK, I respect that.
I have a lot of evidence (well actually www.talkorigins.com does, but this is my post 
). You said earlier that you would look at it. That shows courage and commonsense.
To me, this evidence is clear, and proves both evolution and the age of the Universe.
I really hope you will continue this discussion, and I promise not to attack you (but I will challenge anything you state if I think it is not correct!).
Don’t have a cite, sorry. It’s just my theory, drawn from the political climate of the times and the suspicious (to me) amalgam of various popular religions incorporated into the gospels.
Quixotic, what a wonderful post! I agree with everything you said.
So I have this bag here with “evidence” of God’s existence inside. What would you ask that I bring out of it that would prove there is evidence that he exists?
So give into what I’ve been fighting for this whole thread? I don’t think so.
Squish, thank you for replying. (I noticed that dreamer didn’t.)
I don’t want to hijack this thread furthur, but would you mind if i opened another on this subject?
I don’t mind at all, arisu, with the caveat that, as it’s just my theory, it’s not going to be much of a worthwhile debate.
BTW, Dreamer, I’m interested in how you arrived at the age of 10,000 years for the Earth also, seeing as how the city of Jericho is estimated to be 11,000 years old.
I was over at the talkorigins site, reading and reading and reading and then I come back to check up on a question and see this. I’m not God ya’ know. There’s only so many questions one girl can try to answer here :rolleyes:
My two cents:
All people do not have the same exact experiences. A man will never know what it is like to give birth (hopefully). Likewise, not everyone will have personal proof of God through spiritual experiences. But many do.
Spiritual experiences and lack of proof are evidentiary, but do not amount to the kind of proof of God or no God we are looking for.
The atheist will never have proof that there is no God, while the believer may have proof at any time from now on, should God show Himself to the world.
The best bet is to keep an open mind to all possibilities when there is no proof either way.
dreamer, I apologize if I sound snippy. It’s just that I saw that you’ve replyed to others since I posted, and I have a touch of Paranoid-That-I’m-A Permanent-Invisible-Newbie Syndrome.
I would appreciate a reply, if you get the chance. Your comment really hit a nerve, as several Christians I have spoken to always assume that I am not one because I “didn’t try hard enough”, or “just didn’t want to”, and your post seemed to be in the same vein.
Squish, expect to see the thread in the morning. I’d start tonight, but it is well past my bed time, and I need to organize my thoughts.
OK - let’s do this then. If it’s okay with you I’d like to take one subject at a time and go from there. I’m picking gobear’s subject of Noah’s Ark first since the questions asked were of great interest to me.
I started with this talkorigins page about Noah’s Ark with the first question “How was the Ark built and how could it be made seaworthy”.
Read This and let me know what you think.
[fixed links-Czarcasm]
arisu
Was this the question you were referring to? If so I don’t believe I said anything about any of that.
Here, lemme fix those links for you:
Talk.origins archive article on Noah’s Ark, section 1:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html#building
Look and Live article “What was Noah’s Ark really like?”:
http://www.lookandlive.com/noahsarkpart2.html
My impression:
The author of the second article states that the “gopher wood” that God commanded Noah to build the Ark out of was a reed. (S)he states this matter-of-factly as though (s)he’d just looked it up in his dictionary, when in fact no one knows for sure what “gopher wood” means (not even other Biblical literalists – see the article on Gopher Wood on christiananswers.net).
From this, (s)he proceeds to build a case that a ship of the enormous dimensions of Noah’s Ark as described in Genesis 6:15 (450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet high) could be made seaworthy if built out of reeds held together with pitch. Now, I’m no shipwright, so I don’t know whether his/her construction argument holds water or not (if you’ll pardon the pun). Perhaps it could. This does not mean that “gopher wood” in Genesis really refers to reeds, no matter how much the article’s author would like it to.
And, really, the author is kinda undermining his/her case by saying, “David Fasold believed that he had found the Ark of Noah on one of the mountains near Ararat, and in this he was correct, even though he might now retract his conclusions!” Kinda reminds me of that Shick Sunn Classic Pictures movie In Search of Noah’s Ark (which in fact had been the victim of at least one hoax!)
Kinda hard to answer that, if I don’t know what’s in the bag. 
The problem with this is the same argument can be used for other deities. Just because this Universe exists is not evidence for the Christian god. More precisely, this does not preclude other possibilities. It is just as good for Zeus, Odin, the Celestial Emperor, Brahma, Ra, and Ralph the Snake God.
Solid, irrefutable evidence?
Maybe have the stars form in great big letters saying “YHWH Lives!” or something like that
dreamer, the first time you said ‘know’, the full sentence was ‘I know God exists, for me.’ Now I have no problem with that, and I doubt many others would either. Your faith is very strong, and backed up by your perception of the world. For you, God is with you all the time, in your heart and in the world around you. (I know I’m making a lot of assumptions about your belief, but they don’t seem unreasonable). All this is enough to create a subjective ‘knowledge’, which doesn’t require proof. Is that the kind of ‘know’ you mean?