[Tirinal]

You prove my point -- you can't disprove my argument so now you're telling me I don't get to try and prove my point and you don't have to prove your point. Cheating is the only way you can win ;-)

ToT's position (1): Reason says you can't prove omnipotence with the tools of reason as logic is too limited, and thus any conversion to a belief in omnipotent direction is one of faith.

Your position (2): Reason says reason can't prove the above to be true, therefore it follows that your position is as much one of "faith" as mine and we are both equally limited.

My position: (1) is saying that any worship of an all-powerful diety is hypocritical because your conversion was done under false pretenses, yourself being too imperfect to commit logically to an entity of perfection. (2) is basically saying that because you can't prove yourself imperfect, there is a slight chance you might be perfect.

Before you turn this around using the same trick, I should point out that athiesm isn't a commitment to the totality of there being no God. It's simply a state of mind in which absent data it's presumed there is no God. For all people, there comes a time to decide whether to convert to a religion. There is never a need to "convert" to athiesm, simply because the first "why?" as newborn child asks is from a state of athiesm.

Also! I am very drunk right now. Yay theological debates.

Edit:

You can believe what you want -- free will, free country and etc. -- and you may have found the right answer for you-- but don't delude yourself into thinking you've got the right answer for everybody.

The internet has proved that nobody changes their opinion about anything, ever. I somehow doubt the FoH forums will be the first to buck the trend. I'm mostly here because I'm bored at work.

Edit2:

The astute reader may have noticed through a close reading of the above that I am both drunk and at work. You may now revel in awe at my greatness.