Belief in God is irrational

Antitheism, however, doesn't merely deny theism; it opposes theism. And one of the ways it opposes theism is through argument. Antitheists oppose theism by arguing that belief in God is false, irrational, irresponsible, dangerous, and all the rest. I have repeatedly asserted that for you to participate in a debate regarding rational thought you are, at the outset, being self-contradictory within your own worldview. You cannot account for the necessary, universal Laws of Logic which you try to adhere to claim the irrationality of belief in God. "It's not merely that theism is true; it's not merely that theism can be shown to be true; it's that theism can be shown to be true by any attempt to prove it false. One can prove theism to be false only if, as a matter of fundamental metaphysical fact, theism is true — which is just to say that antitheism is self-defeating. If the laws of logic are metaphysically dependent on God, it follows that every logical argument presupposes the existence of God. What this means is that every sound theistic argument not only proves the existence of God but also presupposes the existence of God, insofar as that argument depends on logical inference. Indeed, every unsound theistic argument presupposes the existence of God. And the same goes, naturally, for every antitheistic argument. The irony must not be missed: one can logically argue against God only if God exists. Insofar as logical argument depends on laws of logic, antitheism depends on laws of logic. Without laws of logic there could be no antitheism — at any rate, no logical antitheism. But if the existence of God is a metaphysical precondition of the laws of logic, it follows straightforwardly that the existence of God is a metaphysical precondition of antitheism. In other words: "Antitheism presupposes theism. " All men do their thinking on the basis of a position or perspective that is accepted by faith. If your faith is not in God who speaks infallibly in His Word through Christ, then your faith is in man as autonomous. "All of one's reasoning is controlled by either of these presuppositions. " Cornelius Van Til, The Case for Calvinism, 128, 129. " Quoted from . http://www.proginosko.com... There is abundant evidence in the created order, in the historical record, in the image of God in man. The evidence for God, and therefore the resultant belief in Him, may not seem reasonable (rational) to you to persuade you to believe in God but what I have attempted to show in this limited space is that it is reasonable proof nonetheless for you to believe. To attempt to debate with both sides using scientific evidence to support each position as if it is neutral ground is, as was demonstrated, futile. Direct, immediate, physical evidence can be and is denied by many- Jesus Appears to the Disciples 36 While they were still talking about this (His death and resurrection), Jesus himself stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you. " 37 They were startled and frightened, thinking they saw a ghost. 38 He said to them, "Why are you troubled, and why do doubts rise in your minds? 39 Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have. " 40 When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet. 41 And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, "Do you have anything here to eat? " 42 They gave him a piece of broiled fish, 43 and he took it and ate it in their presence. Luke 24:36-43 Regarding our worldviews we bring to this debate the interpretation of evidence will be determined by our antithetical presuppositional bias. "Just because we have not yet been able to explain the ontology of logic, love/compassion (we have a working knowledge of this), life-from non-life, laws of the universe (and this), morality, etc. does not necessarily give theists the right to claim their God is the source of this. " Can science "observe" the universal, abstract Laws of Logic? No. Can science, on which Atheism depends as its ultimate authority, "observe" belief? No. Therefore by the final authority as the very basis of Atheism's worldview neither belief nor logic can be accounted for. By its own explanation of the existence of everything that exists there can be no logic, emotions or "working knowledge"-self-refuting. So his argument at the starting point is irrational. He hides behind the demand for more evidence yet he has no foundation for rational inquiry. His house is built on shifting sand. Thomas44 relies on logic to live his life, think, and debate the belief that God does not exist. This is self-contradictory not meeting the requirements for a coherent philosophy of life-an inconsistent worldview and life-application. Inconsistency is a sign of a failed argument. The believer's final authority (God's Word) accounts for all metaphysical abstract universals in reality as reflecting the character of the Creator. The Christian worldview does account for the universal, abstract Laws of Logic providing the necessary preconditions for rational thought. The Christian worldview is therefore consistent and coherent in its philosophy of life. To be a Christian is to believe in God. To believe in God therefore is rational. This is the topic of the debate. God's written revelation records man's willful rebellion in his desire to be independent from Him believing the lie of the tempter that they would be autonomous, subsequently receiving the forewarned curse. This curse included the seed of physical death (the eventual separation of the soul from the body), and spiritual death (separation of the soul from God i. e. the intimate familial relation with Him is forever severed, receiving the due penalty of our sins). This "fall" ruined the whole nature of man. When man fell, sin permeated every part of his personality. This includes his thinking, emotions, and will. Total depravity does not mean he is necessarily intensely sinful, it means that sin has encompassed his entire being. The unregenerate (unsaved) man is dead in his sins. Without the power of the Holy Spirit, the natural man is blind and deaf to the message of the gospel. Man will never seek God on his own; he will never have a desire for God or righteousness. This is why Total Depravity has also been called "Total Inability. " Since man is totally incapable of seeking God, he will never find salvation through Jesus Christ on his own. (John 6:37-65) Sin is "any want of conformity unto or transgression of the law of God" (1 John 3:4; Rom. 4:15), in the inward state and habit of the soul, as well as in the outward conduct of the life, whether by omission or commission (Rom. 6:12-17; 7:5-24). It is "not a mere violation of the law of our constitution, nor of the system of things, but an offence against a personal lawgiver and moral governor who vindicates his law with penalties. The soul that sins is always conscious that his sin is (1) intrinsically vile and polluting, and (2) that it justly deserves punishment, and calls down the righteous wrath of God. Hence sin carries with it two inalienable characters, (1) ill-desert, guilt (reatus); and (2) pollution (macula). ", Hodge's Outlines. . http://www.biblegateway.com... But God, out of mercy, entered into His creation in the person of the Son by taking on human nature-sin excepted. He voluntarily suffered at the hands of unbelievers by being brutally tortured and finally crucified for evidencing the truth. He also suffered the wrath of His Father that was due all His children in their place satisfying divine justice. So that all who repent-turn from their sin and turn to Him believing Jesus is who He said He is and did what He said He did- will be saved.