Page 1 of 2 [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Christian_Warrior
Butterfly
Butterfly

User avatar

Joined: 17 Oct 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 12

20 Oct 2014, 3:27 am

Here is some of the evidence for the existence of God:

1. The creation points to a creator.

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: (Romans 1:20)


The steady state theory of the universe, the idea that the universe has always existed has been disproven scientifically. We know that the universe is expanding and gradually losing its total amount of usable energy. http://christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c039.html This points to a beginning. If the universe has always been here it would have run out of usable energy by now and stopped expanding. (If you had a flashlight with batteries that has always existed then it would have run out of juice by now). Time and space both came into existence when the universe began to exist. Therefore the cause of the universe had to be beyond time, beyond space, and beyond the material realm. The cause of the universe had to be a personal entity because impersonal forces cannot choose to bring time and space into existence. http://www.reasonablefaith.org/is-the-c ... e-universe Since God is beyond time, he had no beginning. Since God is beyond space, he did not come from anywhere. http://www.everystudent.com/wires/universe.html An expanding universe is consist with the Scriptures saying that the Lord stretches the heavens. (Job 9:8, Isaiah 40:22, and Psalm 104:2)

The chances of the universe coming into existence on its own is so small that atheist scientists have come with ideas like an osciliating universe, the multi-verse theory, etc. Each of which would still require a creator. http://www.reasonablefaith.org/the-ulti ... e-universe *Because the Hebrew word for day (yom) in Genesis 1 can be translated as both a time period and a 24-day, I will save the question of the age of the universe for another day.*


2. The existence of life itself.

In biology textbooks, it is theorized life emerged from random combinations of chemicals in a primordial soup. http://www.truenews.org/Creation_vs_Evo ... _life.html
The likelihood that occuring is so low that many atheists/agnostics like Francis Crick (co-discover of DNA in 1953) believed that the best explanation of life on Earth was panspermia (life came from an alien planet). http://www.astrobio.net/topic/origins/o ... emembered/ http://www.panspermia-theory.com/directed-panspermia/
In fact Francis Crick theorized that it was directed panspermia, an alien civilization purposely sent biological life to other planets. So Francis Crick is an intelligent design theorist but a godless one. However directed panspermia only moves the goalpost back (how did life emerge on that alien planet).
The complexity of life points to a designer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_v_SQJFPItg (Frank Turek video) http://www.creationism.org/heinze/SciEvidGodLife.htm


3. The existence of objective morality.

For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: (Romans 2:14)

Without God, morality is just subjective, it would just one person's opinion versus another. There is no true "evil" under subjective morality because your concept of evil would be different than Hitler's concept of evil. How could you compare the two concepts? Objective morality means that morality exists as a meta-physical concept ,that is to say that particular actions or ideas are right and wrong regardless of human opinion (if 90% of a population believe that it is moral to kill everyone over the age of 50 that does not make it moral). Objective morality means that there is a moral code of which we can measure morality that is beyond the human brain. People from all civilizations, with or without the Bible, know that the moral code exists. The Moral Law points to a Moral Law giver. ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOJeseNJneg The great writer C.S. Lewis points out that the moral code is not always the standard which we follow but it is the standard that we want others to follow when treating us. http://www.truthaccordingtoscripture.co ... CqMaPldWJk When we mistreat others, we want mercy. When someone mistreats us, we want justice. Here is a quick test to see if someone is a moral relativist, if they deny objective morality take their wallet and see their reaction. In their book I Don't Have Enough Faith to be An Atheist ,Frank Turek and Norm Geisler lay out the following situation:

" A professor, who was teaching a class in ethics at a university, assigned a term paper to his students. He allowed the students to write on any topic of their choice, only requiring them to properly back up their thesis with documented sources. One student, a relativist, wrote convincingly on the merits of moral relativism. He argued, 'All morals are relative, it's all a matter of opinion; I like chocolate, you like vanilla," etc. His paper was well written, properly documented, the right length, on time, and stylishly presented in a handsome blue folder. The professor read the entire paper and then wrote on the front cover, 'F. I don't like blue folders!'
"When the student got the paper back he was enraged. He stormed into the professor's office and declared, ''F. I don't like blue folders!' That's not fair, that's not right, that's not just! You didn't grade the paper on its merits!'
"Raising his hand to quiet the bombastic student, the professor calmly retorted. 'Wait a minute. Hold on. What's this you say about being fair, right, and just? Didn't your paper argue that it's all a matter of taste? You like chocolate, I like vanilla?'
"The student replied, 'Yes, that's my view.'
"The professor responded, 'Fine, then. I don't like blue. You get an F!'
"Suddenly the light bulb went on in the student's head as he finally got the message. He really did believe in moral absolutes: at least he believed in fairness, rightness, and justice. He realized that he was charging his professor with injustice by appealing to an objective standard of justice. That simple fact defeated his entire case for relativism." (Chapter 7: Mother Theresa Versus Hitler)

4. God is a loving, personal God who will reach out to those who genuinely seek him.

And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: (Acts 17:26-27)

I knew that God existed because I saw the evidence for God in his creation and knew that objective morality existed however my image of God was that of an impersonal deity who created the universe and sat back. However I became a Christian when I was 18 after I encountered the Holy Spirit when I was praying. "No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day." (John 6:44) I know that no amount of evidence can draw someone to God, only the Spirit can. If the Spirit is drawing you, feel free to contact me by private message.
http://www.cru.org/how-to-know-god/woul ... nally.html
http://christiananswers.net/godstory/jesus1.htm



The_Walrus
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 26
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,549
Location: Reading, England

20 Oct 2014, 8:01 am

Christian_Warrior wrote:
We know that the universe is expanding and gradually losing its total amount of usable energy. http://christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c039.html This points to a beginning. If the universe has always been here it would have run out of usable energy by now and stopped expanding. (If you had a flashlight with batteries that has always existed then it would have run out of juice by now).

This isn't what points to a beginning. The mere expansion of the universe does that, along with the cosmic background radiation.

We do not know whether the expansion of the universe will ultimately stop and reverse in a "Big Crunch", or whether it will expand forever until energy is too spread out for anything to happen chemically.

Quote:
Time and space both came into existence when the universe began to exist. Therefore the cause of the universe had to be beyond time, beyond space, and beyond the material realm.

You've jumped the gun and assumed that the universe had a cause. Do you have evidence for that?
Quote:
The cause of the universe had to be a personal entity because impersonal forces cannot choose to bring time and space into existence.

Any evidence for that? And an evidence for a choice?

Quote:
Since God is beyond time, he had no beginning. Since God is beyond space, he did not come from anywhere.

What basis do you have for those claims? And what do they say about the nature of such a god?

For example, if God is beyond time and space then miracles cannot happen. God also knows whether we are going to heaven or hell before we are born. We have no free will. Jesus is totally impossible.
Quote:
The chances of the universe coming into existence on its own is so small that atheist scientists have come with ideas like an osciliating universe, the multi-verse theory, etc. Each of which would still require a creator. http://www.reasonablefaith.org/the-ulti ... e-universe

Evidence?

(FWIW, I thought the telling sentence there was "The prospects of the Oscillating Model were severely dimmed in 1970, however, by Penrose and Hawking's formulation of the Singularity Theorems which bear their names. The theorems disclosed that under very generalized conditions an initial cosmological singularity is inevitable, even for inhomogeneous and non-isotropic universes")

Quote:
2. The existence of life itself.

In biology textbooks, it is theorized life emerged from random combinations of chemicals in a primordial soup. http://www.truenews.org/Creation_vs_Evo ... _life.html
The likelihood that occuring is so low that many atheists/agnostics like Francis Crick (co-discover of DNA in 1953) believed that the best explanation of life on Earth was panspermia (life came from an alien planet). http://www.astrobio.net/topic/origins/o ... emembered/ http://www.panspermia-theory.com/directed-panspermia/
In fact Francis Crick theorized that it was directed panspermia, an alien civilization purposely sent biological life to other planets. So Francis Crick is an intelligent design theorist but a godless one. However directed panspermia only moves the goalpost back (how did life emerge on that alien planet).
The complexity of life points to a designer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_v_SQJFPItg (Frank Turek video) http://www.creationism.org/heinze/SciEvidGodLife.htm

Francis Crick did some cool chemistry 60 years ago. We've learned a lot more since then. The Miller-Urey experiment, for example, shows how organic molecules could have formed in primitive conditions with relative ease, as do repeats of it.

Quote:
3. The existence of objective morality.

For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: (Romans 2:14)

Without God, morality is just subjective, it would just one person's opinion versus another.

Nope.
Quote:
There is no true "evil" under subjective morality because your concept of evil would be different than Hitler's concept of evil. How could you compare the two concepts? Objective morality means that morality exists as a meta-physical concept ,that is to say that particular actions or ideas are right and wrong regardless of human opinion (if 90% of a population believe that it is moral to kill everyone over the age of 50 that does not make it moral). Objective morality means that there is a moral code of which we can measure morality that is beyond the human brain. People from all civilizations, with or without the Bible, know that the moral code exists. The Moral Law points to a Moral Law giver. ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOJeseNJneg The great writer C.S. Lewis points out that the moral code is not always the standard which we follow but it is the standard that we want others to follow when treating us. http://www.truthaccordingtoscripture.co ... CqMaPldWJk When we mistreat others, we want mercy. When someone mistreats us, we want justice. Here is a quick test to see if someone is a moral relativist, if they deny objective morality take their wallet and see their reaction.

Objective morality does not require a god. I would suggest that the reactions you point to can easily be explained using psychology.

If God's view of morality is objectively right, would that mean that genocide was objectively right because a god said so? Or homophobia? Or slavery? Or murder? Or child molestation? No, ridiculous.



DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

20 Oct 2014, 8:41 am

Christian_Warrior wrote:
Here is some of the evidence for the existence of God:

1. The creation points to a creator.
The chances of the universe coming into existence on its own is so small that atheist scientists have come with ideas like an osciliating universe, the multi-verse theory, etc. Each of which would still require a creator. http://www.reasonablefaith.org/the-ulti ... e-universe


You really need to get out more and read physics from actual physicists rather than purported physics from websites with a faith based agenda using cherry picked concepts to prove a point. I suggest you read "a universe from nothing" Laurence M Krauss, "Grand Design'' Stephen Hawing, then look into concepts such as Rainbow Gravity. Above all ask yourself this, why if God requires no creator can this concept not apply to a universe or multiverse, why cannot gravity always have existed.

Christian_Warrior wrote:
2. The existence of life itself.

In biology textbooks, it is theorized life emerged from random combinations of chemicals in a primordial soup. http://www.truenews.org/Creation_vs_Evo ... _life.html
The likelihood that occuring is so low that many atheists/agnostics like Francis Crick (co-discover of DNA in 1953) believed that the best explanation of life on Earth was panspermia (life came from an alien planet). http://www.astrobio.net/topic/origins/o ... emembered/ http://www.panspermia-theory.com/directed-panspermia/
In fact Francis Crick theorized that it was directed panspermia, an alien civilization purposely sent biological life to other planets. So Francis Crick is an intelligent design theorist but a godless one. However directed panspermia only moves the goalpost back (how did life emerge on that alien planet).
The complexity of life points to a designer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_v_SQJFPItg (Frank Turek video) http://www.creationism.org/heinze/SciEvidGodLife.htm


Oh dear you really need to read more. its late and I really cant be bothered so I will just post this. I know its lazy but it should be news to you
Miller/Urey


Christian_Warrior wrote:
3. The existence of objective morality.

" A professor, who was teaching a class in ethics at a university, assigned a term paper to his students. He allowed the students to write on any topic of their choice, only requiring them to properly back up their thesis with documented sources. One student, a relativist, wrote convincingly on the merits of moral relativism. He argued, 'All morals are relative, it's all a matter of opinion; I like chocolate, you like vanilla," etc. His paper was well written, properly documented, the right length, on time, and stylishly presented in a handsome blue folder. The professor read the entire paper and then wrote on the front cover, 'F. I don't like blue folders!'
"When the student got the paper back he was enraged. He stormed into the professor's office and declared, ''F. I don't like blue folders!' That's not fair, that's not right, that's not just! You didn't grade the paper on its merits!'
"Raising his hand to quiet the bombastic student, the professor calmly retorted. 'Wait a minute. Hold on. What's this you say about being fair, right, and just? Didn't your paper argue that it's all a matter of taste? You like chocolate, I like vanilla?'
"The student replied, 'Yes, that's my view.'
"The professor responded, 'Fine, then. I don't like blue. You get an F!'
"Suddenly the light bulb went on in the student's head as he finally got the message. He really did believe in moral absolutes: at least he believed in fairness, rightness, and justice. He realized that he was charging his professor with injustice by appealing to an objective standard of justice. That simple fact defeated his entire case for relativism." (Chapter 7: Mother Theresa Versus Hitler)


OMGoodness I don't think I have ever read such nonsense or a paragraph laden with so many strawmen.
Christian_Warrior wrote:

4. God is a loving, personal God who will reach out to those who genuinely seek him.



I am guessing you have not read the old testament.

I am being dismissive of your views because I have heard them all before and like your predecessors you appear not to have read beyond your site of indoctrination. You clearly cannot see the fallacies you are presenting and I can only assume this is because you have only read one page articels on the subjects you are raising.


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


drh1138
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 2 Dec 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 498

20 Oct 2014, 11:25 am

God is dead. Even if your "god" were real, and stood before me, I would decide myself what is good and evil.



adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

20 Oct 2014, 12:59 pm

Christian_Warrior wrote:
Here is some of the evidence for the existence of God:


I believe that what you meant to say was "This is how far I must distort reality in order to justify my beliefs to myself:". You have provided no evidence of any deity.

Quote:
1. The creation points to a creator.


Even if this were true (it isn't), it is not necessary for the "creator" to be a god or gods.

Quote:
2. The existence of life itself.


Classic case of "we don't know: therefore GOD". Your ignorance is not evidence for a god or gods.

Quote:
3. The existence of objective morality.


Morality is subjective, you have failed to demonstrate otherwise.

Quote:
4. God is a loving, personal God who will reach out to those who genuinely seek him.


"He is there, you're just not looking properly!"

Quote:
I know that no amount of evidence can draw someone to God, only the Spirit can. If the Spirit is drawing you, feel free to contact me by private message.


Ah, so you're here to proselytise rather than debate. With the greatest of respect, kindly bugger off.



AspE
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,114

20 Oct 2014, 1:06 pm

1. We don't know if the Big Bang was the only beginning, or even an actual beginning. We don't know if the universe is eternal. In any case, having a beginning doesn't imply a god. Or a first cause.

2. Evolution refers to the origin of species. Abiogenesis, life from non-life, is plausible. Your criticisms arise from a misunderstanding of the theory. It's certainly not random.

3. Objective morality arises from the commonality of man, nothing else. Religious morality is neither truly moral nor objective. For instance, the Bible says slavery is OK.

4. No He doesn't.



androbot01
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,746
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada

21 Oct 2014, 4:17 pm

There probably are beings in the universe more intelligent than us and maybe they know what's going on, but we don't. OP, trying to force others to believe in your faith seems pointless to me. It's not belief in the omnipotent that gets people through the day, but rather the chasing of consumer products. Worship of the dollar is the guiding force.



pezar
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2008
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,432

21 Oct 2014, 8:35 pm

Unfortunately, since Tallyman left, we have nobody to whack the Jesus Droid Trolls. That means that we're likely stuck with this one for a while. :(

Absolute morality, for one, doesn't require God. My pet theory is that absolute morality was created at the moment of the universe's creation, and is written in our genes. Mankind will always ask, what created the universe then? We simply don't know. One alternative is deism, the idea that what/whoever created the universe has zero relation to Jesus and is no longer involved in it's creation. Some very famous and well educated people have been deists; among them George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.

The existence of life is possible without a life-creator. Here's a name so few know that you probably won't find him in Wikipedia: Andrew Crosse. Crosse lived in the early 19th century, and conducted experiments with electricity. His neighbors thought he was a demon for all the weird lights in his house.

One day, he wondered what would happen if he took a hunk of pumice from a volcano, immersed it in salt water, and passed a steady electric current through it. What actually happened was quite extraordinary: buglike creatures grew on the pumice, and eventually were swimming in the salt water. He got the same results even when he controlled for variables like the possibility of external contamination.

Several scientists, including Michael Faraday (who you likely HAVE heard of), got the same results. Biologists who examined Crosse's bugs declared them to be an unknown species. Crosse's tale was told in the 1959 book Stranger Than Science. Crosse may have stumbled on the origins of life, however 200 years ago most people still believed in life's divine origins. Crosse's find was buried.

As for being touched by the "Holy Spirit" while praying, many atheists have prayed and were not touched.



wittgenstein
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,512
Location: Trapped inside a hominid skull

21 Oct 2014, 9:20 pm

The multi-verse, Evert many worlds combined with the anthropic principle explain why a designer is unnecessary.
Morality is universal because of its survival value. We evolved morality because it helps the species survive.
I do not think you are a troll and I also think that your points were intelligent. Its just that you do not know all the facts.
I do! 8)


_________________
YES! This is me!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gtdlR4rUcY
I went up over 50 feet!
I love debate!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtckVng_1a0
My debate style is calm and deadly!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-230v_ecAcM


AspieOtaku
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,051
Location: San Jose

21 Oct 2014, 11:49 pm

God does not exist because I wished him away with a magic lamp!


_________________
Your Aspie score is 193 of 200
Your neurotypical score is 40 of 200
You are very likely an aspie
No matter where I go I will always be a Gaijin even at home. Like Anime? https://kissanime.to/AnimeList


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,547

22 Oct 2014, 7:30 am

Well the truth is, now as proven by science the interdependent relationship of all things also known as GOD per the words as reported by the dude Jesus, aka Yeshua, in the gospel of Thomas, does now most definitely exist.

Yes, down to the Quantum level of physics, GOD EXISTS. :)

The problem is convincing religious LITERAL THINKING fundamentalist folks that GOD otherwise known as Mother Nature true, and or the Interdependent Relationship of ALL THINGS per ALL THAT IS, and or GOD, if one gets the ALL INCLUSIVE LIVING BOTH INANIMATE AND ANIMATE NATURE OF GOD, PER THE smallest units of fractal measure in the UNIVERSE STRAIGHT AND GOLDEN SPIRALING, AT THE golden mean of 1.618 AS ULTIMATE TRUTH AS the Interdependent relationship of All things, once again, aka GOD and or Mother Nature TRUE!

And the problem with Atheists is much the same, they are often literal rather than metaphorically thinking folks that can't get the simple metaphorical LOGIC, YES LOGIC, that GOD and the nature of all things as is, is simply the same dam thing.

But here's a quote attributed to and from that real man Jesus aka Yeshua who simply GETS IT by spending 40 or so days in nature in the desert separated from the conspiracy theorists in dogmatic religious ways, as quoted here, for those of you who can understand simple metaphors.

Not all can, and that's also a fact of life, as is, and yes, part of GOD aka the interdependent relationship of all things; both atheists and fundamentalist Christians, overall (means not all) have the same general literally thinking issue, and are quite the same, (once again, overall) per their basic human nature, in different ways of thinking and understanding metaphors of life, both emotional and existential, in nature, per the interconnecting interdependent force of ALL THAT IS AKA GOD.

CALL IT THE FORCE OR A MAGIC BLUE TURTLE; THE BOTTOM LINE IS:

IT EXISTS, AT ESSENCE OF ALL THAT IS.

And it's pretty hard to miss, for those who can read between the lines of life, and true as same with atheists and fundamentalist religious folks (overall) it's like the eye of the needle and a camel attempting to enter it, in trying to convince them of the simplicity of it, inside, outside, as above so below, per the fractal nature of ALL THAT IS.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/thomas.htm

Quote:
37) His disciples said to him, "When will you be visible to us,
and when shall we behold you?"
He said, "When you strip naked without being ashamed, and
take your garments and put them under your feet like little
children and tread upon them, then you will see the child of the
Living, and you will not be afraid."


YEAH, Jesus it 'appears' IS a stripper, so it is no wonder he 'hung' around prostitutes, separated from culture, as pariah's, as they too LIKELY 'better' escaped the illusory forces of an imaginary CULTURALLY CONTRIVED MYTHOLOGICAL GOD, as opposed to the REAL LIVING GOD, THAT LIVES WITH US, INSIDE, OUTSIDE, ABOVE, SO BELOW, IN OTHER WORDS THE WHOLE DAM THING AS IS.

And now that science is finally catching up with Freud and or Jung per the human archetypes of mind, in our instinctual animal memories, that the Greeks and Romans measured concretely through their mythological GOD's of emotions, so humans could better emote these powerful emotional sources of energy in their life, by abstractly describing them, and more concretely measuring their effectiveness in real life measure of usage, by the abstract concepts to better measure the realty of emotions in real life day to day, now to now, as a true emoting energy force:

Yes now science will likely eventually catch up with the reality of synchronicity, in big picture thinking and conceptual reality of the tapestry of fractal nature as is, in communicating reality as is, to all of us, amazing as it may be, as reality too, but only when we are emotionally connected to reality, fully as possible as is, as emotions are the fuel of all understanding, focus, and even executive functioning in life.

And yes Emotions are the glue of life AND MIND. Without full usage of them, one simply does not have full usage of human potential.

It's no wonder the Greeks and Romans, looked at emotions as Mythological GODS, as truly they are the greatest force that humans have access to for emoting the only thing that counts, in REAL LIFE, LIFE, YES, LIFE, AS IS, WITH GOD, once again, the Interdependent relationship of ALL THAT IS, that one finds when stripping down to core of human nature, without the illusory forces of a culture gone truly insane, in many ways, of both rigid and illusory thinking.

Humans are the only animals smart enough to describe GOD, or 'smart' enough to miss GOD altogether.

Overall, other animals have the advantage, as is, with GOD, throughout human history as it stands.

But who knows, with freedom of information, anything is possible, as long as it stays uncensored.

THE truth is out there for those who seek, and well, for those who ignore it, it is as is, too.

The bottom line is, one cannot change what is, but one can think they can.

Otherwise known, as control, the greatest illusion of all, of knowing as truly:

We do not know. That's what Socrates means by that. He was not in control and this:
GOD thingy IS, which most ironicAlly is, US too, as science now shows too.

Science just has a different name for IT:

NATURE: AKA GOD: THE INTERDEPENDENT RELATIONSHIP OF ALL THINGS:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGK84Poeynk[/youtube]

IT IS FUNNY: HOW OFTEN ONE GOES WITHOUT ?REaLLY? DEFINING GOD in these discussions.

Amazingly so, to me, as the answer is so simple now, and TRULY AMPLIFIED BY SCIENCE AS EVIDENCED IN THE VIDEO above:

PER RICHARD FEYNMAN:

'The imagination of Nature is so much greater than man'; IT?s ALWAYS GONNA KEEP US GUESSING AS TO WHAT IS, IS, PER ALL OF NATURE.

And please note:

For clarity, per my emotional intent in reciprocal social communication, when I use caps I am not screaming or preaching, I am just using the literary tool of CAPS to amplify the salient parts of wordy discussions, like a frigging science project; as many people have a hard enough time getting through 140 twitter characters, as science now shows that the average human being has less of an attention span than a gold fish; seriously research now shows that.

But again, the eye of the needle and that camel thingy, gets smaller and bigger all of the time everywhere we go, as long as attention spans and attention to deeper ways of thinking shrink to more shallow, instead of growing like a river, when instant gratification isn't a given.


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


izzeme
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Apr 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,665

22 Oct 2014, 7:40 am

this is an attempt to shoehorn a god into science, taking assumptions: you assume that god is beying time and space (is he doesn't have a beginning, why is the universe required to have one).

also: science has proven that the entirety of existance can be explained without invoking any sort of diety.
true, this doesn't disprove god, but it does hurt many reasons for him being there.

point for point:

1) creation requires a creator
well, kind of true, but this assumes that there is a creation in the first place, which isn't a given

2) the existence of life itselt
this is combining two different theories: evolution and abiogenisi.
also, the 'spontanious' creation is less unlikely then you'd think, there are 2 proven 'trees of life' on earth alone, and several creatures that dont fit and point to a 3rd or even a 4th tree (completely unrelated, different citric acid cycles, for example), so it is actually quite likely that life appears without a creator

i]3) objective morality[/i]
this doesn't exist, all religions have different opinions, cultures as well.

4) god is loving and personal
yup, he is personal and loves you, just like guardian angels, demons, alternate personalities, and many other scyzophrenic traits.
if there truly was a god, wouldn't he he roughly the same for everyone? shouldn't the 6 different types of christianity be the same, let alone the other religions?


all i see in a christian (or any other religion, let's not try and bash one type here), is shoehorning a diety into "well, you didn't prove he isn't there" or disarming himself by making him too personalized.
i dont actively oppose the idea of a god though, i just don't believe in any of the earths mainstay religions utill they make a conclusive argument, that can be objectively tested and proven, without having different explanations possible



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,547

22 Oct 2014, 8:30 am

pezar wrote:
Unfortunately, since Tallyman left, we have nobody to whack the Jesus Droid Trolls. That means that we're likely stuck with this one for a while. :(

Absolute morality, for one, doesn't require God. My pet theory is that absolute morality was created at the moment of the universe's creation, and is written in our genes. Mankind will always ask, what created the universe then? We simply don't know. One alternative is deism, the idea that what/whoever created the universe has zero relation to Jesus and is no longer involved in it's creation. Some very famous and well educated people have been deists; among them George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.

The existence of life is possible without a life-creator. Here's a name so few know that you probably won't find him in Wikipedia: Andrew Crosse. Crosse lived in the early 19th century, and conducted experiments with electricity. His neighbors thought he was a demon for all the weird lights in his house.

One day, he wondered what would happen if he took a hunk of pumice from a volcano, immersed it in salt water, and passed a steady electric current through it. What actually happened was quite extraordinary: buglike creatures grew on the pumice, and eventually were swimming in the salt water. He got the same results even when he controlled for variables like the possibility of external contamination.

Several scientists, including Michael Faraday (who you likely HAVE heard of), got the same results. Biologists who examined Crosse's bugs declared them to be an unknown species. Crosse's tale was told in the 1959 book Stranger Than Science. Crosse may have stumbled on the origins of life, however 200 years ago most people still believed in life's divine origins. Crosse's find was buried.

As for being touched by the "Holy Spirit" while praying, many atheists have prayed and were not touched.


And fortunately we have remaining moderators with enough human empathy to understand that different minds and experiences in life, with different accumulations of knowledge do not make trolls, but do make folks autistic or not autistic alike, in this journey of life, of seeking truth.

Patience is the virtue that is more often lost now, along with the human empathy part that seeks to assist rather than dismiss, folks with different opinions, experiences of life, and accumulations of knowledge, all of which are an opportunity to grow in life, rather than to stay stale.

I choose to grow.

But that's a choice, that is real, in life, too.

To grow, and not to dismiss the realities of others, as missing, in life, rather than an opportunity to truly grow as human being, both in facts and emotional virtue, as the second part of intelligence, yes emotional intelligence, has always been the most important part of human intelligence in social animal survival including ALL HUMANS, TOO, yes autistic or not.

Just because someone has a differing opinion, experiences or knowledge in life, and is not afraid to openly express them on this part of the site, however the personal attacks may come as cost, those folks are the courageous ones, not those who respond with personal attacks or unfounded accusations, as that is the lowest level of critical thinking in any discussion of merit, in finding truth, in socratic inquiry, and that's just a fact of informal, formal debate; or just plain inquiry into the nature of human life and all of mother nature, as is.

This is what we can do here, if given the opportunity in civil discourse as is, and my personal feeling is now, that opportunity here is better, all things considered for the whole of the autism spectrum that wishes to communicate and gain support in this area of the discussion forum, as is.

That's a relief to me, as one who is into inquiry rather than proving who is right or who is wrong.

And just my opinion, to be crystal clear.


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


slave
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2012
Age: 108
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,410
Location: Dystopia Planetia

22 Oct 2014, 8:42 pm

Christian_Warrior wrote:
Here is some of the evidence for the existence of God:


blah, blah, imaginary friend, blah, blah, ad fking nauseum!

What is the point of you regurgitating this stone age flotsam?

Do you think any of us care?

Do you think you'll score browny points with your sky faery if you try to convert the heathen?

You believers just keep coming back for more....it must be masochism. Oh I get it...if we reject you and your godspel then we deserve our fate in Hell. Fine have it your way.

PS you wouldn't know evidence if it sh*t down your neck.



AspE
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,114

22 Oct 2014, 9:39 pm

If they did come back for a discussion, that would be welcome. Instead they drop a load of propaganda and then bail.



slave
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2012
Age: 108
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,410
Location: Dystopia Planetia

22 Oct 2014, 9:42 pm

AspE wrote:
If they did come back for a discussion, that would be welcome. Instead they drop a load of propaganda and then bail.


how true