To: The Philosopher who wrote (11738 ) 4/17/2001 6:49:45 PM From: thames_sider Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 82486 CH, I think you mistake the proposition. The stance of the atheist (or maybe even agnostic, in its commoner meaning now) is 'Show me why I should believe. Prove your assertions to me, so that I will trust them over what I have seen myself, or at least over what impartial and uncaring observers describe'. IMO we've seen here that it is not possible to disprove by reason alone the existence (or otherwise) of some personal feeling or belief... but this begs the question. It's up to the believer to prove, not the reverse. It's the stance of the Christian believer that asserts the existence of a creator, the resurrection of a corpse, the existence of an immanent and immortal soul, redeemable only by acceptance of doctrine... so prove it. Numbers of believers are no proof - we should be flat-earthers. The same goes for historical attestation, of which Mohamed has far more than his less recent predecessors - and rather more proof of the victory of his cause, if history is allowed a precedent... Saints? Every religion has its holy speakers, and plenty of martyrs... we can accept their belief, but that's not proof of truth any more than the 'truth' of the beliefs of any poor 'pagan' slaughtered as Europe became Xtian, or indeed North America... Let me rephrase it: I don't doubt your belief . Prove your truth . Don't just quote the books of your own faith, prove that what they say is real, here and now... and not just the truisms and aphorisms, plenty of religions have valid morals and sayings. Show me why those things you assert which go against all we see and hear and know of the real world are true, and the other claimants are not.