It’s only a big happy accident if the end result is supposed to be exactly what we see when we look around the world today. Things didn’t have to be this way. Not sure why you’re assuming they did.

Don’t -- unless you want to continue being incorrect.

Sure, paint the two as equals.

All of the things I said about evolution where correct.

I never assumed that they had to be this way. I am actually assuming that they could have been different!

You do assume that there is something special about the current end result, as far as the universe is concerned.

I don't understand then, why you don't think a "happy accident" (as you put it) is a reasonable explanation for everything we see.

I'm getting tired of this convo for now. If you want to discuss call me or hit me up on skype and we can continue.

You must be referring to another thread. That didn't happen in this one.

Our House......IT'S A TRAP!.....Sure it will start out as a nice theological discussion but when its all done you will find yourself signing papers on a new Bentley!

Nah, it's cool. I usually wind up selling him stuff.

lol, that's true. but I do have you to thank for getting me on e-cigs and quitting smoking. So I figure we're even!

Understand evolution very thoroughly
See some of the horrific things that happen to animals in nature
See some horrific genetic diseases
See aliens

This thread really goes to show you how closed-minded theists really are. They gave no reasonable ways they could be convinced.

In the other thread, the atheists gave many basic requests that any true religion/God should have no problem producing.

Atheists aren't stubborn in their beliefs. If there is a God, most of us would gladly convert to whatever religion is correct. It's just too bad that if God does indeed exist, all his signs point to his nonexistence.

People are frequently compared to trees in the bible. Faith is what produces fruit. If we lack patience and chop it down before it produces fruit from us what good did it do us?

If we know that a tree is going to produce a fruit(because we've observed it before) then sure chopping it down before it does would be silly unless you got good reasons to do so, on the other hand , none of us know what blind faith would produce and even if it would produce anything at all. So what's your point?

I gave 3 very reasonable specific ways. And in the other threads I saw almost no one giving a serious answer other than DS, and everyone then fought him on what he said. Could you show me where someone in the other thread gave an actual specific answer, other silly things like "evidence" which is so ambiguous it is really worthless.

To be fair, how could they? If the ways were reasonable, then why haven't they swung already?

They have no reason to give up their beliefs by new findings of science unless their belief was merely a god of the gaps one. They can't say "if X is explained" or else it just means they had a 'godmustadunit" belief system which some of the more sophisticated ones would be embarrassed to admit. Yeah, you'll still get some of that from some uninformed believers but the claim doesn't stand up to experience, the god-of-the-gap has shown he can just move farther into the shadows. No amount of new findings matter.

Can we nominate this for worst analogy of the year?

Because "findings of science" are irrelevant.
How can a finding of science disprove the existence of a supernatural realm when science works only within the confines of naturalism?

100% correct. But by the same token, in the natural realm, scientific findings should be given the highest level of credibility because of its rigorous nature. So while science can neither prove nor disprove the existence of a deity outside of the universe, it certainly can cast doubt on traditional "religious" accounts of the natural world. Deism is not a belief that can be scientifically evaluated. Biblical literalism and its variants are.

That is always the standard response however can you quote me generations of people that claim to have seen and talked to Hakamatana first hand?

I am not saying that is the deciding factor but having generations of people claiming to see Hakamatana's miracles would help.

I spent a whole week with HAKAMATANA in heaven, he showed me everything, he showed me also how he created this world... He is for real. Believe me, I also saw hell you don't want to to there. All you need to do is pierce your testicles and you will be saved... Trust me.. I've seen the miracles, I've seen everything.. Some of my family members already saw the miracles I have performed. All my uncles pierced their testicles. You better believe it now, HAKAMATANA doesn't joke when he talks of hell. You don't want to end up in there.. So just pierce your testicles and be saved. One more thing I forgot to mention. Last weekend HAKAMATANA spoke to me and told me his name needs to be known all over the place and he wants me to write a book he will inspire. I'm also building a new church of HAKAMANATA and will be taking donations. He said that the first 100 people who donate more then $10,000 each will be saved and end up with extra powers in afterlife.

So what do you think? Gonna pierce that testicles and send me a check?

In that case maybe i should convert... Oh wait, did all this just happen to you or do you have hundreds of thousands of people that say they saw HAKAMATANA perform miracles first hand. I know it is not proof that HAKAMATANA exist, but it would sure help your case.

Let me know ASAP because i am at the bank and they are read to wiretransfer the 10k to you.

I already have about 100 followers and it's growing...

btw. I accept paypal..

On a serious note I do not think there is some kind of dominant strategy in terms of game theory as it pertains to religion. Religion is NOT based on facts, it is based on faith, and thus it is mostly subjective. For example, you can look at the Bible and decide it does not warrant your faith and I can look at the same book and say it does warrant my faith. Neither of us is wrong because it is our own personal opinion that said book is credible. Now to answer the question outlined in the thread title for a believer to unbelieve, you need to change my opinion on how I perceive my religion in order to have a decent shot. This is extremely hard because believers stand to loose more by becoming an unbeliever than an unbeliever stands to lose by becoming a believer, assuming we both believe we are correct.

To once again state game theory, think of it this way. there are 2 options for each religion. believe and not believer. 2 potential facts, either the religion is true or it is not true. (neither of us can guarantee that the other is completely false). The subjective part of this problem is how likely it is that said religion is truthful. And I will assign arbitrary numbers to the payouts of each decision.

So going to heaven is worth 10.
Going to hell is worth -10.
Knowing that you go nowhere after death is worth 2.
Believing that you are going to heaven when actually when you die you rot in the ground is worth -2.

So in this box, there are 4 possible results. 10, -10, 2, -2. These are objective pay outs. Now we must assign weighted percentages to these payouts based on how likely we believe they may occur.

What happens is that Believers assign 90-95% likelihood to going to heaven if you believe, so it makes the other potential payouts not even worth considering. You have to change how “believers” weight the payouts in order to make any valid case to convert, but again I say this to you, we stand to lose more by switching over because if we are wrong we go to hell when we otherwise wouldn’t have.