Oh dear...

Quick run down of thoughts:
- An omnibenevolent God existing in a world of evil is an extremely old problem
- IMHO, although I am agnostic myself, I think that if there *is* a God, then today's beliefs are outdated, and based on what may well have been exaggerations and misinterpretations made by man - who is essentially flawed - when he tried to interpret God's words. This is simply an explanation I might throw together if I could be bothered to argue.

Ignore me.

True, I do think however, that my contention of continuity in the universe creates a system which is logicaly consistant. it circumvents the problems of why God doesn't simply fix all our problems fairly nicely.

I supose this does in a way strike down the idea of omnipotance, but really, I'm not overly concerned about the premises of mainstream religion.

There are those who would argue that the meaning of life is learning. I was of that opinion for a while but now I am not so sure. I think the "meaning of life" changes on a day to day basis, it evolves in tandem with your personality.

I think, meaning, and God, are where you find them. it's different for every individual. you can either choose to find them or not. The problem many people have is that they search to high up and far away, when the answere is right under their nose.

your arguement hinged on how the four assumptions that you put forward were fundamental beliefs of a theist, and to deny any one of these beliefs would be to "relinquish the traditional concept of god."

it was the bit in quotes^ that prompted my response. i seen it as satanic subterfuge.

traditionally, isn't our social/individual concept of god derived from biblical texts? believing this to be the case, i used one of those traditional texts to expose your lies.

haha, get behind me.

It's not, thankfully- you'll always get the 'God Squad' running around in their funny jumpers and singing in the middle of the road though, but oh well, just smile and ignore them

Lies? Dear me, St. Thomas would turn in his grave

Besides, the bible is too easy a target for inconsistency arguments

Sorry to drag this up again, but I've had a thought- my more learned Christian friends would tell me that as a non-believer, I will simply not go to heaven. Presumably you've all read the bible. What am I meant to make of such vagueness and ambiguity over this point, I am confused by the message the bible gives us, which surely can't be right for the perfect Word of God.

I mean, the bible tells us that slavery is ok (Leviticus 25, Exodus 21- God says to Moses, "If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property."- and even Jesus says it's okay to beat your slaves, in Luke 12).

There are also a lot of instances where God says it's acceptable to kill a man for certain reasons, e.g. if they hit their parents (Exodus 21), adultery or homosexuality (Leviticus 20, Deuteronomy 22), atheists or people who believe in other religions (2 Chronicles 15, Deuteronomy 13- this passage even states you should burn down whole towns which contain even one non-believer!), or even working on a Sunday (Exodus 31). Isiaiah 14:21 also tells us it's okay to slay the children of people who have done wrong. God also says that if a man rapes an unmarried woman he must pay a fine, and that they must get married.

These morals are taught along with the 'standard set' that Christianity is meant to stand on- they're from the same books- but are, strangely, ignored. I am muchly confused about the message of the bible, and how you have to cherry-pick it for it to seem 'right'.