Jump to content


Photo

There's Probably No God...


  • Please log in to reply
113 replies to this topic

#101 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 07 December 2008 - 02:26 PM

The Taliban thinks it's doable.

View Post


That's not what I asked and you know it :)

#102 Guest_shpongle_*

Guest_shpongle_*
  • Guests

Posted 07 December 2008 - 03:10 PM

I dont think pelicans evolved from penguins or the other way around.I would have suggested that hawks and eagles shared a common ancestor based on their morphology,but dna analysis,just this year has put them in different families.

Thats also what has happened with the emmu and ostrich.

"Birds" plural,is a generalization,without wasting all day listing every species,genera,and family.

Thanks.

View Post


Like I said, you guys should get together and figure all this out.

#103 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 08 December 2008 - 02:20 AM

Like I said, you guys should get together and figure all this out.

View Post


I think there is some merit to this. However, this isn't necessary to reveal that evolution is a myth. Nobody here will stop someone from believing evolution. At the end of the day the questions are this:

Are all the proofs/evidences for evolution sealed up to exclude other options?

Are evidences being distorted to convince kids in our public schools today that evolution is a better theory then what it actually is?

Is the naturalistic/agnostic mindset required to engage in science and to develop deeper inquiries about nature?


Shpongle, I think you are very interested in separating the scientist from the average person in a way that the scientist can only be accountable to other scientists. Is this true and is it realistic?

I think evolutionary scientists are starting to find themselves on a bubble similar to what church clergy did several years ago when they tried to play the “Only other priests understand…” trump card. The end result was laymen rising up, bringing more robust and deeper understanding to scripture by questioning the establishment where contradictions and mind games were seen in doctrine. The same thing is happening today in the field of evolutionary assumptions. This here, new group of doubters and questioners, isn’t going away. :) In fact the more evolutionary scientists appeal to having esoteric knowledge that is too hard to understand to cover up apparent contradictions the more interest will be generated on the layman level because I haven’t met a person yet that doesn’t enjoy a little controversy.

Unlike someone who doesn’t believe in God. I believe people are made in the image of God, even the atheist, which means I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt when wanting to engage in a baloney detecting session. If this sounds offensive, it is really meant as a compliment to anyone worthwhile for learning with and learning from.

Scientists in the field of evolutionary study would do well to study the church or any area where someone finds themselves a posit of truth and the pride involved in leadership. Pride builds you up and knocks you down just as fast. Belief in God is not our primary problem in this culture. It’s thinking that we are more then what we really are and thinking that we know more then what we really know.

Christians admit their faith even with the vast field of apologetics and reasonable inquiry that validates Jesus’ work and history in an empirical way.

It’s time for the evolutionists to admit their faith.

Any evolutionist that finds themselves frustrated in a discussion with Christians often sees one thing. They think we just pull out the faith card to stop engaging in a dialogue. Faith is important to the Christian but any mature Christian should know that faith is only good if it’s in the truth. I would propose that an evolutionist who is frustrated in a discussion is not frustrated because of the faith of Christians but it’s a frustration based in the denial of their own belief in evolution as a faith while holding it.

#104 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 08 December 2008 - 04:57 PM

I think there is some merit to this. However, this isn't necessary to reveal that evolution is a myth. Nobody here will stop someone from believing evolution.

View Post


Actually, I came here hoping someone would challenge my views on the world. Maybe even help me understand why some people are theists.

#105 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 09 December 2008 - 04:57 AM

Actually, I came here hoping someone would challenge my views on the world.  Maybe even help me understand why some people are theists.

View Post


Here is one of my favorite seminars. I think it is just for you:

Ravi Zacharias - Can Man Live Without God?

Enjoy it.

Take your time with it. Ravi speaks directly to the matter of truth and why there are so many beliefs.

The discussion of Evolution is primarily a philosophical one. Read this post from yesterday before you let popularity paint in what is true.

http://www.evolution...indpost&p=21576

#106 de_skudd

de_skudd

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,518 posts
  • Location:North Augusta, SC
  • Interests:reading, learning, talking and stuff
  • Age: 41
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • North Augusta, SC

Posted 23 December 2008 - 08:24 AM

The British Humanist Association has raised funds to promote the slogan "There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life" on London busses.
http://news.bbc.co.u...don/7681914.stm
Thoughts?

View Post


The key to this logical conundrum is the word “probably”…. This is a problematic “probably” for the atheist’s worldview because they have their percentages skewed. So I have to ask; What “probability” percentages are you using to make such a statement? Are you relying on the law of non contradiction (i.e. either/or logic) to reach this probability? Are you saying that the probability is higher that everything came from nothing as opposed to all this design came from something? Because I would then have to ask; the last time you were walking through the woods, and saw a cabin, did you say “Wow, I wonder where that came from?

No, the probability is much higher that there is a God… So the slogan should read “There probably IS a God. Quit hiding and seek Him out”.


Just a few things for the atheist to ponder as he/she attempts to disprove the existence of God:

You may be a fundy atheist if....

1- You believe that extra drippy ice-cream is a logical proof against the existence of God, because an omniscient God would know how to stop the ice-cream from being extra drippy, an omnipotent God would have the ability to stop the ice-cream from being extra drippy, and by golly, an omnibenevolent God wouldn't want your ice-cream to be extra drippy.

2- Although you've memorized a half a dozen proofs that He doesn't exist, you still think you're God's gift to the ignorant masses.

3- You believe the astronomical size of the universe somehow disproves God, as if God needed a tiny universe in order to exist.

4- You think questions like, "Can God create a rock so big that He cannot lift it?" and, "Can God will Himself out of existence?" are perfect examples of how to disprove God's omnipotence and ultimately how to disprove God. When someone proves to you the false logic behind the questions (i.e. pitting God's omnipotence against itself), you desperately try to defend the questions, but then give up and go to a different Christian site to ask them.

5- Related to the above, you spend a great deal of your spare time writing to Christian websites asking them these very questions.

6- You spend hours arguing that a-theism actually means "without a belief in God " and not just " belief that there is no god" as if this is a meaningful distinction in real life.

7- You call a view held by less than ten percent of the American public "common sense".

8- You blame God for the starvation, sickness, pain and suffering in the world...when, indeed, it is MAN's greed, politics, selfishness and apathy that not only causes, but also ignores the sick and the starving masses. We aren't our brothers' keepers....but we should be.

9- You believe that if something cannot be touched, seen, heard, or measured in some way, then it must not exist, yet you fail to see the irony of your calling Christians "narrow-minded".


Again, just some stuff to think about

#107 de_skudd

de_skudd

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,518 posts
  • Location:North Augusta, SC
  • Interests:reading, learning, talking and stuff
  • Age: 41
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • North Augusta, SC

Posted 23 December 2008 - 08:53 AM

Like I said, you guys should get together and figure all this out.

View Post


Oh it's been figured out... Some people just don't like the answers... Or the design built into everything....

#108 de_skudd

de_skudd

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,518 posts
  • Location:North Augusta, SC
  • Interests:reading, learning, talking and stuff
  • Age: 41
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • North Augusta, SC

Posted 23 December 2008 - 09:19 AM

Actually, I came here hoping someone would challenge my views on the world.  Maybe even help me understand why some people are theists.

View Post


Challenging your views isn't a problem, challenging anyone’s views is an easy task. It all depends on these four factors:

1- How logically sound their views are
2- How philosophically sound their views are
3- How scientifically sound their views are
4- How dogmatically they grasp to flawed views in the face of opposing facts

I have yet to hear an atheistic argument that can fulfill all four factors in a positive way. Being a former atheist, I can truthfully say, this is one reason I am no longer so.

I also freely admit that there are immature and/or lazy theists that fail this test as well. I also freely admit that NO ONE has all the answers. That everyone should always be seeking truth, otherwise they fall into the immature and lazy category.

But, at the end of the day, the atheist worldview is woefully lacking when it comes to logical backing..

#109 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 07 January 2011 - 10:58 AM

There is probably not an invisible dragon in my garage, or a china teapot orbiting the sun somewhere between Earth and Mars.

View Post


This is a poor analogy used by atheists attempting to disprove God. It is misused all the time; and it is easily refuted!

Just look at the claim… The atheist pretends like there are no credible claims for God, (when in fact there are many!), so they posit an irrelevant “red herring” (Argumentum ad Ignoratio Elenchi) such as a “dragon in my garage”, or a “china teapot orbiting the sun somewhere between Earth and Mars”. This argument in actually a non sequitur, because it does not follow due to the examples not being analogous to the thing in which they are being compared to, therefore the conclusion does not follow (because it is an irrelevant conclusion).

The argument is easily refuted by many lines of evidence… The Historicity of Christ, The Teleological Argument, The Ontological Argument, The Cosmological Argument, The fact that there “Laws of Logic” and “First Principles” etcetera…

But, back to the Historicity of Christ… There is enough credible “eye witness” testimony found there to use against the atheists argument.

But if insist there is, can you prove me wrong? Probably not.

View Post


If you insist, than I desire you to provide “credible” evidence… Also, we can prove you wrong by opening your garage door! But none of that relieves you from the responsibility of providing evidence for your assertion!

And so it is with God. Since He can't be proved or disproved, He must remain a probability. To me and other athiests, He's extremely improbable. Therefore, there is probably (very probably) no God.

View Post


The problem for the atheist is “God can indeed be proven”. But the atheist just doesn’t like the evidence (notice I didn’t say they could disprove the evidence), so they refuse to admit it exists. And when they say, “but God isn’t falsifiable”, the theists say, but God is falsifiable… Just provide the corps of Jesus! The contemporaneous authorities didn’t falsify Jesus, but they had the opportunity!

#110 AFJ

AFJ

    AFJ

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baton Rouge, LA
  • Interests:Bible, molecular biology, chemistry, mineralogy, geology, eschatology, history, family
  • Age: 51
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 07 January 2011 - 09:54 PM

This just confirms what the Bible says will happen. There will be a huge falling away (people rejecting God). Then a big revival. Then the rapture. These events just show how close we are. What you are now wittnessing, is prophecy being fulfilled. This part of the predicted prophecy has never happened in history.

View Post

I can't wait for the revival. Thy kingom come Lord!

#111 AFJ

AFJ

    AFJ

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baton Rouge, LA
  • Interests:Bible, molecular biology, chemistry, mineralogy, geology, eschatology, history, family
  • Age: 51
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 07 January 2011 - 10:08 PM

This is a poor analogy used by atheists attempting to disprove God. It is misused all the time; and it is easily refuted!

Just look at the claim… The atheist pretends like there are no credible claims for God, (when in fact there are many!), so they posit an irrelevant “red herring” (Argumentum ad Ignoratio Elenchi)  such as a “dragon in my garage”, or a “china teapot orbiting the sun somewhere between Earth and Mars”.  This argument in actually a non sequitur, because it does not follow due to the examples not being analogous to the thing in which they are being compared to, therefore the conclusion does not follow (because it is an irrelevant conclusion).

The argument is easily refuted by many lines of evidence… The Historicity of Christ, The Teleological Argument, The Ontological Argument, The Cosmological Argument, The fact that there “Laws of Logic” and “First Principles” etcetera…

But, back to the Historicity of Christ… There is enough credible “eye witness” testimony found there to use against the atheists argument.  
If you insist, than I desire you to provide “credible” evidence…  Also, we can prove you wrong by opening your garage door! But none of that relieves you from the responsibility of providing evidence for your assertion!
The problem for the atheist is “God can indeed be proven”.  But the atheist just doesn’t like the evidence (notice I didn’t say they could disprove the evidence), so they refuse to admit it exists. And when they say, “but God isn’t falsifiable”, the theists say, but God is falsifiable… Just provide the corps of Jesus!  The contemporaneous authorities didn’t falsify Jesus, but they had the opportunity!

View Post

Yes Ron. They have to deny the testimonies of millions of born again Christians, who have a touch of God in their lives. Just the circle of people I know contains many miraculous testimonies of answers to prayers.

When I was in one church, we had a pastor who actually had a very organized prayer program--best I've seen. I had the oppurtunity to pray with the four morning intercessors, including the pastor, a couple of summers, while I was in school. We had a list we would go around the circle praying over. Then we had names of all the people in the congregation we would take home with special prayer request.

The pastor had a time of prayer in the middl of the service on Sunday. He had a list of petitions and a list of praises (answered prayers), right in the bulletin. We saw so many petitions turn into praises. And people would give glory to God for the answers during the service. You could just feel the power on the testimonies.

The praises included healings, restored marriages, people returning to the Lord, people getting the jobs they needed, even feeling enablement in school (wisdom), the working out of special circumstances over which they had little control, etc.

For doubters--they will always doubt. But no one will ever tell me there is no God. I have seen his great work with my own eyes. And I have sensed, I'm sure as many of you have, His Presence and moving. Something only a corporate body of believers can perceive in worship.

I have a great interest in science. I enjoy reading new things in it. But I have no doubt at all in the ressurection of Jesus Christ. As a result, I sense that same power of ressurection working in me at times, raising me from the dead!! Romans 6

#112 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 10 January 2011 - 05:41 AM

And I only have to assume that evolution does not exist.  I can also assume that God exists.

View Post

Evolution happens, you can observe it.

View Post


Actually, no it doesn’t; and no you cannot. Simply "saying it's so" doesn't make it so. Therefore, the above is an atheists faith statement.

If evolution happens, and we could observe it, then there would be no argument.


The moment the evolutionists provided “actual” evidence of macroevolution, the argument would cease. But, since all the evolutionists can do is speculate, and pretend these speculations are “facts”, they end up with major problems.

#113 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 10 January 2011 - 05:48 AM

I don't think you can qualitfy the probability of God's existence. However, if "God exists" is a legitimate claim (and I kind of assume Christians think so), then obviously, the claim "God does not exist" is an equally legitimate claim.
Hans

View Post


Absolutely! And, if you make the claim "God does not exist", you are obligated to provide evidence for that claim, or admit it as a “faith statement”.

#114 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 10 January 2011 - 06:07 AM

Could you present some?

View Post

Absolutely!

1- The Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God
2- The Teleological Argument for the Existence of God
3- The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God
4- The Cosmological Argument for the Existence of God
5- The Law of Causality supporting the Existence of God
6- The Law of Non-contradiction supporting the Existence of God
7- The Positive Principle of Modality supporting the Existence of God
8- The Negative Principle of Modality supporting the Existence of God
9- The Principle of Existential Causality supporting the Existence of God
10-The Principle of Existential Contingency supporting the Existence of God

I use all of these arguments. But, personally, the best is the Historicity of Jesus Christ is far better evidence. But a cumulative usage of the above arguments is more than sufficient to dismantle the atheists argument of “just is” or “just so” or “the paradox of the stone” or “abiogenesis” or abusing “The Cosmological argument” by inferring “if everything needs a cause, than God needs a cause” (etcetera…)


I very much doubt he said anything of the sort. Where did you hear this?

View Post


Out of his own mouth, in an interview he had with Ben Stein on the movie “Expelled”!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users