God

["Charles Brown" <CharlesB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"Devine, James" wrote:
>
>
>
> As far as I can tell, there's no logical argument either for or against the
> existence of "god."

^^^^^^^

CB: First , what is God ?  Next, I would call for a combined logical and evidentiary argument on the issue ( maybe Jim D. implicitly means to include evidence by his meaning of "logical", though).

Once we decide on a definition , if we choose one of the historically commonly used definitions ( such as " a Big Guy up in the sky" or ominipotent, omnipresent , omniscient and eternal being) , then there is a logical argument that God doesn't exist based on evidence as good as , say, the argument that the ether doesn't exist in physics or that species don't originate by a single divine creation or the solar system has always existed. In brief, the arguments against the existence of God are as logical as our most logical other arguments. We can hold belief in no God as an _a posteriori_ rebuttable presumption.