Evidence for God

Leastbay said
I would think if Jesus had a website it would have flash animation or something.

Negative. Jesus has banned Flash from all of his devices in favor of the yet to be fully developed and widely used HTML5.

gmaw, I'm still waiting for you to respond to my post a few pages back.

MLU said
Here you go: http://www.jstor.org/pss/188646?cookieSet=1

Niall Shanks and Karl H. Joplin of East Tennessee State University completed studies that showed complex systems argued by Behe can occur naturally as a result of self-organizing chemical processes. They also successfully argue that Behe's approach is overly simplistic and he cherry-picked certain features to make his argument, ignoring the entire picture and being selective in making his argument. There are also numerous computer simulations that show his argument to be extremely flawed.

An argument can be made that stone arches are also irreducibly complex. If you remove a single stone, the entire structure collapses. It seems that us stupid humans have mastered the stone arch easily enough, so the idea God was behind creation because of he appearance of overly complex systems is just silly.

It took me fives minutes to find a dozen studies that blow IC out of the water using science. You go digest that study and then get back to me...

Also, before you go off spouting Occam's Razor, you need to actually understand it and not it's popular misuse on message boards and SciFi re-runs. A more accurate paraphrase of it's meaning would be "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity" and not "so simple, a caveman could do it".

FleurDeLeap said
Jesus was a real person. Now I know what you're going to say next, but that's just pure ignorance or stubbornness emitting from you.

Here's something fun to do: Go on YouTube, find a very hateful comment, and reply to it saying, "God bless you." 100% of the time the answer I have gotten back is something around, "**** your god. You're an ignorant piece of **** for believing all the bull crap!" Seriously, every single time that person has been either an atheist or agnostic. I'm not saying everyone that is an atheist or agnostic is always in a bad mood, but every time I've seen one on the internet they act like that and try to make themselves sound so smart by calling everyone else ignorant.

I think that it's very likely that Jesus was a real person or at the very least, based on a real person. So was Muhammad, Peter, etc. It's the "Son of God" part that I have a problem with. Jesus wasn't even the first Messiah, though and there is enough of his story that mirrors religions that pre-date him to bring the accuracy of his existence into question.

LafourcheSaint said
Atheists are just as much a thorn in the side of common sense as Evangelicals.

By definition, this is impossible. Evangelicals rely on faith, casting aside what can and cannot be proven. Atheists rely on logical reasoning, casting aside what is unseen and cannot be proven. There is nothing "common sense" to believing that someone walked on water, was born of a woman who never had sex, calmed stormy seas or turned water into wine.