Ifyoulikeitsomuchwhydontyougolivethere?

[NotAllThere]

...or their parents did that for them...

Which neatly overlooks the fact that not a few people convert to Christianity as adults.

[sasguru]

Let's face it, there's not one scrap of evidence for the existence of the supernatural, all-powerful being we call God that hasn't been created in the (admittedly superb) imagination of mankind.

[ThomasSoerensen]

Let's face it, there's not one scrap of evidence for the existence of the supernatural, all-powerful being we call God that hasn't been created in the (admittedly superb) imagination of mankind.

ooooh but God does not comply to the model with evidense and tulip, you have to trust me, and maybe donate a bit, in God and all the stories in the big book. Otherwise he will send you to hell. But he loves you.

[contractor79]

more than a story invented for the authors personal gain, yes

explain how science provides ethical and moral guidance

[sasguru]

explain how science provides ethical and moral guidance

It doesn't.
HTH

[ThomasSoerensen]

explain how science provides ethical and moral guidance

are you saying that since I don't believe in any god, or other superhero, I cannot have ethical and moral values?

the elegant process of evolution favoured species with the right balance of individualism and group caring. If not, we would not be here. Nothing to do with God imposing his ten corporate values on me.

by writing science I implied rationality, causality, reason, evidence. These things can lead to my ethical and moral values.

[sasguru]

Yes atheists seem to be more "moral" than religious people:

http://www.skepticfiles.org/american/prison.htm

[The Lone Gunman]

Let's face it, there's not one scrap of evidence for the existence of the supernatural, all-powerful being we call God that hasn't been created in the (admittedly superb) imagination of mankind.

No, but we eventualy reach the creation paradox.

[NotAllThere]

I've been an atheist since I was about 12. I tried to read Dawkins book but gave up as I found he wasn't really saying anything new.
What do Christians believe, then, that wasn't written by a few beardy old blokes a few thousand years ago? Just like the Muslims believe their own beardy old blokes.
Why should the Bible take precedence over the Koran? Why are our (Jewish) beardy old blokes likely to be more truthful that theirs or Hindu beardy old blokes?
Dawkins is right and it's all a heap of nonsense.

AIUI and IANAT Christianity doesn't say anything about God having a beard, nor about him living in the sky.

The bible takes precedence over the Koran, apparently, because the former was written by between ~1000BC and 200AD, and the latter ~400AD. The Koran flatly contradicts stuff in the Bible. E.g. the bible says Abraham was asked to sacrifice his son Isaac. The Koran says it was Ishmael. Now, the biblical tale has been around since at least 600BC (when the septuagint, the greek translation of the old testament was written ). There's no evidence that the koranic tale existed any time before the Koran was written.

Asking whether someone believes in the bible is a bit odd. It's a collection of 66 books. One of them is a book of poems and songs. What's to believe?

[sasguru]

No, but we eventualy reach the creation paradox.

You mean why the Big Bang happened or who or what kicked off evolution, for example?
I suppose we'll never know but if there was a supreme intelligence who started it all off, she, he or it, for want of better words, has obviously never intervened again.