14 of 28
14
will freethinkers accept god if they find evidence?
Posted: 29 April 2013 05:21 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 196 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7506
Joined  2007-03-02
Adonai888 - 29 April 2013 04:52 AM
Write4U - 29 April 2013 04:47 AM

So, where does that prove a scriptural god?

1. i am not here to prove something. Rather to present evidence for a creator God.

2. i am not presenting evidence in first stance for the God of the bible.

You fail.

Let me ask you this, if there is a creator god, then who created the creator god?

 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2013 05:25 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 197 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  384
Joined  2009-05-03
Mriana - 29 April 2013 05:18 AM
Adonai888 - 29 April 2013 02:34 AM
Mriana - 28 April 2013 07:57 PM

  There is no other answer, esp given that the universe is made up of atoms that bonded together..

Why should that be evidence that there is no God ?

I never said it was.  I just said the idea of a deity is a human concept.  Any definition you give of a deity is your concept of one and not a deity at all.

You do assert a priori, that if God exists, he is unable to reveal himself to us, and inspire people to testify and write in his name.

I’d rather say, atoms and the atomic forces are finely tuned , which is one more evidence for a fine tuner :

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t31-the-extreme-fine-tuning-of-the-universe

The strong force: (the force that binds nucleons (= protons and neutrons) together in nucleus, by means of meson exchange)

You get your alleged evidence from a religious website?  oh oh

what does it matter ? the presented facts are scientific and universally aknowledged by science. If you don’t believe, make your own research.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2013 05:26 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 198 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  384
Joined  2009-05-03
Mriana - 29 April 2013 05:21 AM
Adonai888 - 29 April 2013 04:52 AM
Write4U - 29 April 2013 04:47 AM

So, where does that prove a scriptural god?

1. i am not here to prove something. Rather to present evidence for a creator God.

2. i am not presenting evidence in first stance for the God of the bible.

You fail.

Let me ask you this, if there is a creator god, then who created the creator god?

nothing. A eternal God, without beginning, and without a end, was not created, but simply is. Interestingly, this is how the God of the bible reveals himself all through the bible.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2013 05:27 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 199 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4626
Joined  2007-10-05
Mriana - 29 April 2013 05:18 AM

You get your alleged evidence from a religious website?  oh oh

Hilariously, that site quotes atheists in its feeble attempt to prove a creator god.

 Signature 

“In the beginning, God created the universe. This has made many people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.”
Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2013 05:28 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 200 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7506
Joined  2007-03-02
Adonai888 - 29 April 2013 05:25 AM
Mriana - 29 April 2013 05:18 AM
Adonai888 - 29 April 2013 02:34 AM
Mriana - 28 April 2013 07:57 PM

  There is no other answer, esp given that the universe is made up of atoms that bonded together..

Why should that be evidence that there is no God ?

I never said it was.  I just said the idea of a deity is a human concept.  Any definition you give of a deity is your concept of one and not a deity at all.

You do assert a priori, that if God exists, he is unable to reveal himself to us, and inspire people to testify and write in his name.

You are not putting words in my mouth.  I never said that.  I said any definition of a deity that one comes up with is only a human concept.  That has nothing to do with anything else one may or may not believe about any potential deity nor is it a denial.  It is just a statement of fact concerning a human concept of a deity.

I’d rather say, atoms and the atomic forces are finely tuned , which is one more evidence for a fine tuner :

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t31-the-extreme-fine-tuning-of-the-universe

The strong force: (the force that binds nucleons (= protons and neutrons) together in nucleus, by means of meson exchange)

You get your alleged evidence from a religious website?  oh oh

what does it matter ? the presented facts are scientific and universally aknowledged by science. If you don’t believe, make your own research.

~ this is suppose to quote Adonaii, but it’s not working.

Religion and science or rather mythology and science do not mix and religion is nothing more than mythology misunderstood.  You also can’t spell or use spell check.

[ Edited: 29 April 2013 05:33 AM by Mriana ]
 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2013 05:31 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 201 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7506
Joined  2007-03-02
DarronS - 29 April 2013 05:27 AM
Mriana - 29 April 2013 05:18 AM

You get your alleged evidence from a religious website?  oh oh

Hilariously, that site quotes atheists in its feeble attempt to prove a creator god.

I saw that.  Isn’t it amazing that God doesn’t use dice, but rather chance?  LOL

 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2013 05:33 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 202 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  384
Joined  2009-05-03
Mriana - 29 April 2013 05:28 AM
Adonai888 - 29 April 2013 05:25 AM
Mriana - 29 April 2013 05:18 AM
Adonai888 - 29 April 2013 02:34 AM
Mriana - 28 April 2013 07:57 PM

  There is no other answer, esp given that the universe is made up of atoms that bonded together..

Why should that be evidence that there is no God ?

I never said it was.  I just said the idea of a deity is a human concept.  Any definition you give of a deity is your concept of one and not a deity at all.

You do assert a priori, that if God exists, he is unable to reveal himself to us, and inspire people to testify and write in his name.

You are not putting words in my mouth.  I never said that.  I said any definition of a deity that one comes up with is only a human concept.  That has nothing to do with anything else one may or may not believe about any potential deity nor is it a denial.  It is just a statement of fact concerning a human concept of a deity.

I’d rather say, atoms and the atomic forces are finely tuned , which is one more evidence for a fine tuner :

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t31-the-extreme-fine-tuning-of-the-universe

The strong force: (the force that binds nucleons (= protons and neutrons) together in nucleus, by means of meson exchange)

You get your alleged evidence from a religious website?  oh oh

what does it matter ? the presented facts are scientific and universally aknowledged by science. If you don’t believe, make your own research.

Religion and science or rather mythology and science do not mix and religion is nothing more than mythology misunderstood.


i keep waiting for good reasons to believe philosophical naturalism is true. As long as you don’t, or are unable to, you have nothing on hand. You need to construct your world view on positive evidence, not on a negative.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2013 05:35 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 203 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4626
Joined  2007-10-05
Mriana - 29 April 2013 05:31 AM
DarronS - 29 April 2013 05:27 AM
Mriana - 29 April 2013 05:18 AM

You get your alleged evidence from a religious website?  oh oh

Hilariously, that site quotes atheists in its feeble attempt to prove a creator god.

I saw that.  Isn’t it amazing that God doesn’t use dice, but rather chance?  LOL

I should have used the term “quote-mines atheists” instead of “quotes atheists,” because it is more accurate. Quote inning is, of course, dishonest.

 Signature 

“In the beginning, God created the universe. This has made many people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.”
Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2013 05:36 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 204 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  384
Joined  2009-05-03
DarronS - 29 April 2013 05:35 AM

Quote inning is, of course, dishonest.

Its not dishonest, as long as it represents in context what the author really meant to say.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2013 05:38 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 205 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7506
Joined  2007-03-02
Adonai888 - 29 April 2013 05:33 AM

i keep waiting for good reasons to believe philosophical naturalism is true. As long as you don’t, or are unable to, you have nothing on hand. You need to construct your world view on positive evidence, not on a negative.

After work, I’ll see what I can do, but for now, ponder that we are 98% genetically similar to other apes.  That isn’t philosophical though, that is a scientific fact.  I don’t need philosophy to show naturalism is true.  Here’s another suggestion, if you have the day off, try reading “Why Evolution is True”.

For everyone else…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJwhqhqBtbo

Enjoy the video above my fellow freethinkers.  smile

 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2013 05:41 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 206 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  384
Joined  2009-05-03
Mriana - 29 April 2013 05:38 AM
Adonai888 - 29 April 2013 05:33 AM

i keep waiting for good reasons to believe philosophical naturalism is true. As long as you don’t, or are unable to, you have nothing on hand. You need to construct your world view on positive evidence, not on a negative.

After work, I’ll see what I can do, but for now, ponder that we are 98% genetically similar to other apes.  That isn’t philosophical though, that is a scientific fact.  I don’t need philosophy to show naturalism is true.  Here’s another suggestion, if you have the day off, try reading “Why Evolution is True”.

For everyone else…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJwhqhqBtbo

Enjoy the video above my fellow freethinkers.  smile

ET is a small part of the whole picture. you need to provide good reasons of why philosophical naturalism is true in regard of the existence of the universe, its fine tuning, the arise of life, biodiversity, and conscience of men, its hability of speech, and sex.
But we can start with your assertion of similarity of humans and apes. I’ll get to that later. I have to work now.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2013 06:05 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 207 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7506
Joined  2007-03-02
Adonai888 - 29 April 2013 05:41 AM
Mriana - 29 April 2013 05:38 AM
Adonai888 - 29 April 2013 05:33 AM

i keep waiting for good reasons to believe philosophical naturalism is true. As long as you don’t, or are unable to, you have nothing on hand. You need to construct your world view on positive evidence, not on a negative.

After work, I’ll see what I can do, but for now, ponder that we are 98% genetically similar to other apes.  That isn’t philosophical though, that is a scientific fact.  I don’t need philosophy to show naturalism is true.  Here’s another suggestion, if you have the day off, try reading “Why Evolution is True”.

For everyone else…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJwhqhqBtbo

Enjoy the video above my fellow freethinkers.  smile

ET is a small part of the whole picture. you need to provide good reasons of why philosophical naturalism is true in regard of the existence of the universe, its fine tuning, the arise of life, biodiversity, and conscience of men, its hability of speech, and sex.
But we can start with your assertion of similarity of humans and apes. I’ll get to that later. I have to work now.

ET?  I’m not talking about the space alien.  Even so, you’re the first I’ve heard call Evolution “ET”.  Seems to me you also don’t know what scientific theory is, so I’ll have to explain that also after I get home from work.

As I said, I don’t need philosophy, but if you want philosophy, try the Tao sayings- Chapter 1 verse 1 and “Those who know, don’t say.  Those who say, don’t know.”  Now that’s philosophical.

 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2013 06:59 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 208 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  908
Joined  2005-01-14
Adonai888 - 27 April 2013 01:36 PM

Science has brought a big deal of understanding of our universe, and our environment, no doubt about that. But it has shown us as well the limit, and how far it can do. The origin of all that exists however is a entirely other subject…

Whoa, slow down!  You were asking for an argument in favor of Philosophical Naturalism, which I gave you.  You even AGREED that science has brought a “big deal of understanding of our universe”.  Case closed.

Now you expect it to have the ultimate answers to every possible question?  Nope, not yet.  But philosophical naturalism is the only way we are ever going to figure it out.

And it has shown as well, that naturalistic answers do not hold scrutiny to explain natural phenomenas. They fall short to explain the cause of the universe, its fine tuning, the arise of life, the biodiversity, the consciousness of men, its hability of speech etc.

That’s just your opinion.  I don’t think they fall that short at all.  Science explains it all much better than “assuming” that there’s some kind of supernatural creature.

what is amazing, is only how proponents keep believing in this failed theory. The evolution theory is more a religion, rather than something else. The natural evidence falls short from backing up the theory, thats why it is in crisis….. but the religious of course are blind to admit that.

Evolution is not a religion.  If there were legitimate reasons to reject it, I would.  But by admitting that as a proponent of a religious opinion, YOU are blind to any alternative, you have just said the first sensible thing in your whole post.  Congratulations!

If evolution was true, there should be large numbers of intermediate fossil organisms present in the fossil record.

Actually there are!  Another example of your blindness.

[ Edited: 29 April 2013 07:11 AM by Advocatus ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2013 07:47 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 209 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1283
Joined  2011-03-12

1. i am not here to prove something. Rather to present evidence for a creator God.

Bullcrap.

Your second statement absolutely puts the lie to the first.

Since you have now shown a demonstrated predilection for lying, I see no reason why you should be taken seriously or be seen as anything other then the troll you obviously are.

 Signature 

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2013 08:43 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 210 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2891
Joined  2011-08-15

Since you have now shown a demonstrated predilection for lying, I see no reason why you should be taken seriously or be seen as anything other then the troll you obviously are.

Which is why I gave up trying back on post 149 when he attempted to refute the science behind bat wings. Now he’s throwing the old “where’s the fossils” argument from the Ken Ham play book. His specious A priori arguments show a lack of understanding of evolutionary processes or, in understanding them attempt to use science to refute science, yet another ID trick. I wouldn’t bother trying to break the bubble; looks like he’s in it to stay.

 

Cap’t Jack

 Signature 

One good schoolmaster is of more use than a hundred priests.

Thomas Paine

Profile
 
 
   
14 of 28
14