Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 157 (8144 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 10-24-2014 1:59 PM
78 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: cheryllocascio
Upcoming Birthdays: DrJones*
Happy Birthday: purpledawn
Post Volume:
Total: 738,509 Year: 24,350/28,606 Month: 1,651/1,786 Week: 513/423 Day: 53/101 Hour: 9/12

Announcements: Emails Restored


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
910
11
12131415Next
Author Topic:   Evidence for God
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 2129 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 151 of 213 (482780)
09-17-2008 11:57 PM
Reply to: Message 148 by Agobot
09-17-2008 6:19 PM


Re: A plea
Agobot writes:

We have enough evidence to convince an unbiased and unprejudiced person that the existence of God is close to zero, but we don't have ENOUGH evidence to fill each and every gap in knowledge to which ClosedMInd will try to hold on and make an ill-supported case that will fit his beliefs.

You are funny. First of all, you are completely swayed by bias. Second of all, you have not presented a single shred of evidence to disprove the existence of G-d. All any atheist will ever say is that there is no evidence for a god. This does not make any evidence against a god. Third of all, there are many people in the world with more brains than you have, that continue to practice their religions. If you really had such a strong case, why are so many religious people so smart. I have already explained to you that atheism has been around for longer than you want to believe. If it was so clear to everyone else as it is to you, most of the major world religions would never have come into existence in the first place. Unfortunately, it is your bias and comfort that lead you to deny G-d, and not your brain. Show me an unbiased atheist and I will show you anything you wish for.

Edited by Open MInd, : No reason given.

Edited by Open MInd, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 148 by Agobot, posted 09-17-2008 6:19 PM Agobot has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 158 by Agobot, posted 09-18-2008 7:19 AM Open MInd has not yet responded
 Message 159 by Agobot, posted 09-18-2008 10:40 AM Open MInd has responded
 Message 161 by Agobot, posted 09-18-2008 3:17 PM Open MInd has not yet responded

    
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 2129 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 152 of 213 (482781)
09-18-2008 12:05 AM
Reply to: Message 149 by Granny Magda
09-17-2008 10:43 PM


Re: Actually Getting Back On-Topic
Granny Magda writes:

None of that matters though does it? Even if I were to accept your foolishness about cause and effect being essential and universal, that is still not evidence for God. There could be another cause. You need to provide specific evidence that allows us to differentiate between God and any other potential cause, something that you have monumentally failed to do.

You did not ask for a proof of G-d's existence. All you asked for was evidence. Therefore, I have told you that everything that exists in the world is evidence of G-d. Theoretically, if nothing existed than there would be no evidence of G-d. You have interpreted the evidence to mean something else. But, this does not change the evidence.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by Granny Magda, posted 09-17-2008 10:43 PM Granny Magda has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by bluescat48, posted 09-18-2008 5:54 AM Open MInd has not yet responded
 Message 160 by Granny Magda, posted 09-18-2008 3:11 PM Open MInd has not yet responded

    
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 2129 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 153 of 213 (482783)
09-18-2008 12:10 AM
Reply to: Message 136 by Cat Sci
09-17-2008 2:26 AM


Re: Actually Getting Back On-Topic
Unlike Christianity, there is no such thing as blind faith in Judaism. There is a commandment to actually know that G-d exists. G-d could not command anyone to believe that G-d exists. If the person believed already than such a command will be meaningless. But, if the person did not believe, he would not be able to actually listen to the command. A Christian with blind faith is almost as bad as an atheist. There is an obligation to know G-d, not just to believe that a god may hypothetically exist. The way to fulfill the commandment of knowing G-d is by removing as much bias from the mind as possible. This is done by not leading a ic life, and instead searching for the truth.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Cat Sci, posted 09-17-2008 2:26 AM Cat Sci has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by iano, posted 09-19-2008 8:59 AM Open MInd has not yet responded

    
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 2129 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 154 of 213 (482785)
09-18-2008 12:19 AM
Reply to: Message 143 by bluescat48
09-17-2008 3:51 PM


Re: Actually Getting Back On-Topic
This is why I mentioned the Jewish people as evidence. The Jews have a tradition that dates all the way back to the 600,000 eye witnesses. You do not want to accept this as evidence. But, it actually is evidence none the less. I will tell you the same thing as I told Granny Magda, you are looking for evidence, not a mathematical proof. Evidence does exist, and I have presented it already.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by bluescat48, posted 09-17-2008 3:51 PM bluescat48 has not yet responded

    
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 2129 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 155 of 213 (482787)
09-18-2008 12:22 AM
Reply to: Message 142 by Modulous
09-17-2008 3:41 PM


Re: Actually Actually Getting Back On-Topic
The Jews are actually outside the Torah. There are 10,000,000 Jews today that claim the tradition of their fathers. Testimony is evidence as far as I am concerned. Other religions do not have such a testimony. You can still reject the evidence, but this does not stop it from continuing to be evidence.

Edited by Open MInd, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by Modulous, posted 09-17-2008 3:41 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by Modulous, posted 09-18-2008 2:43 AM Open MInd has responded

    
Modulous
Member
Posts: 6451
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 156 of 213 (482805)
09-18-2008 2:43 AM
Reply to: Message 155 by Open MInd
09-18-2008 12:22 AM


Re: Actually Actually Getting Back On-Topic
The Jews are actually outside the Torah.

Correct.

There are 10,000,000 Jews today that claim the tradition of their fathers.

Agreed, more or less.

Testimony is evidence as far as I am concerned.

OK, so what testimony? The testimony recorded in Exodus does not count, so what testimony do you refer to?

Other religions do not have such a testimony.

What testimony? Numbers? No, Jews are one of the smallest well known religions - Hinduism has it beat. Age? Hinduism at least matches it.

You can still reject the evidence, but this does not stop it from continuing to be evidence.

You haven't provided evidence that exists outside of the Bible that YHWH is the Creator.

You have provided evidence that may or may not argue that a Creator exists and that Judaism is one of the longest surviving religions. Outside of the Bible, how does you propose this demonstrates that YHWH is the creator?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by Open MInd, posted 09-18-2008 12:22 AM Open MInd has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by Open MInd, posted 09-19-2008 1:59 PM Modulous has responded

    
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 656 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 157 of 213 (482814)
09-18-2008 5:54 AM
Reply to: Message 152 by Open MInd
09-18-2008 12:05 AM


Re: Actually Getting Back On-Topic
You did not ask for a proof of G-d's existence. All you asked for was evidence. Therefore, I have told you that everything that exists in the world is evidence of G-d.

That is not evidence but still blind faith. One could as esily say that it was evidence of Zeus or Ra or any other deity. It would still be faith not evidence.

(open Mind) You can still reject the evidence, but this does not stop it from continuing to be evidence.

(Modulous) You haven't provided evidence that exists outside of the Bible that YHWH is the Creator.

You have provided evidence that may or may not argue that a Creator exists and that Judaism is one of the longest surviving religions. Outside of the Bible, how does you propose this demonstrates that YHWH is the creator?

As modulous states there is no confirming evidence only ~3000 year old writings.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Open MInd, posted 09-18-2008 12:05 AM Open MInd has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by Brian, posted 09-18-2008 4:49 PM bluescat48 has not yet responded

    
Agobot
Member (Idle past 1997 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 158 of 213 (482824)
09-18-2008 7:19 AM
Reply to: Message 151 by Open MInd
09-17-2008 11:57 PM


Greedy molecules could be behind the emergence of life
If you are OpenMInded and not closed-minded as i think, what do you think of this recent discovery from last month, published in Nature:

"Greedy molecules could be behind the emergence of life

Artificial system shows how a molecular soup could be exploited by a single self-replicating complex.

Katharine Sanderson
soup
Imagine adding a pea that turned all the carrots, cauliflower and leeks into more peas ...Punchstock

A molecule can ensure that copies of itself — rather than any other possible reaction products — are produced from a soup of smaller molecules. This demonstrates that complex structures could have evolved from a pool of simple molecules billions of years ago, its developers claim.

Douglas Philp, a chemist at the University of St Andrews, UK, has previously shown that a molecule made of two halves that recognise and bind to one another can then act as a template for its own replication1. Along with his colleague Jan Sadownik, he has now discovered that this template molecule can drive its own formation in a bigger pool of many more reactants, quickly taking over the processes in that pool and dominating the system so that almost no other products have a chance to form.

This kind of self-replicating system has been proposed as an explanation to how complex molecules such as DNA could have formed, ultimately triggering the emergence of life. Artificial versions of these systems, however, have remained elusive.
Strange brew

Philp's system relies on a soup of 25 different molecules, built up from various combinations of a few simple components — different aldehydes, some with an amidopyridine group, and a maleimide. The resulting 25 molecules in the soup can all interconvert with each other.

There is nothing special about this mixture until a slightly different maleimide is used. That gives just one of the resulting 25 products exactly the right building blocks to become the special self-replicating molecule that Philp's lab developed previously.

“This shows that you can bring order from chaos”

Douglas Philp
University of St Andrews, UK

Once this template molecule is formed as one of the 25 soup ingredients, it can grab its constituent parts out of the mixture and bring them together to create a complementary copy of itself. The template molecules subsequently grab more of their constituents, and the process repeats itself. Because the original mixture of molecules can all interconvert, the equilibrium in the soup changes so that the reactant pool feeds the self-replicating molecule's formation. The end result is that 93% of the mixture becomes the template molecule.

"Despite the fact this system can make goodness know how many compounds, you get one product," says Philp. "This shows that you can bring order from chaos."
Love and marriage

The process will work as soon as the correct maleimide is added, but it can be speeded up by adding a tiny amount of the complete template molecule. Philp presented his work last week at the American Chemical Society's national meeting in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Philp hasn't got a practical use for his system yet. But that's not the point, says Eric Anslyn, a supramolecular chemist from the University of Texas at Austin. Demonstrating a system similar to that which might have created life is enough, he says, and it might well inspire other chemists to find a more practical use. "The cleverness in his initial design might spark many other clever designs," he says.

Still, Philp envisages a time when a self-replicating system could be used to make, on demand, a range of different compounds, depending on the template you throw in at the start.

"Artificial self-replicating systems represent amongst some of the most intellectually challenging and stimulating of topics in contemporary chemistry today," says Fraser Stoddart, a chemist from Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois.

"Who knows" whether Philp's work can help to explain how life began, says Stoddart, but, he says, "life processes and self-replication go together like a horse and carriage, or love and marriage. You can't have one without the other.""

Full text here:

http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080826/full/news.2008.1062.html


This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Open MInd, posted 09-17-2008 11:57 PM Open MInd has not yet responded

    
Agobot
Member (Idle past 1997 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 159 of 213 (482839)
09-18-2008 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 151 by Open MInd
09-17-2008 11:57 PM


Re: A plea
Оr what do you think of this:

"VATICAN CITY - The Vatican said on Tuesday the theory of evolution was compatible with the Bible but planned no posthumous apology to Charles Darwin for the cold reception it gave him 150 years ago.

Archbishop Gianfranco Ravasi, the Vatican's culture minister, was speaking at the announcement of a Rome conference of scientists, theologians and philosophers to be held next March marking the 150th anniversary of the publication of Darwin's "The Origin of Species."

Christian churches were long hostile to Darwin because his theory conflicted with the literal biblical account of creation. Earlier this week, a leading Anglican churchman, Rev. Malcolm Brown, said the Church of England owed Darwin an apology for the way his ideas were received by Anglicans in Britain..."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26747166/


This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Open MInd, posted 09-17-2008 11:57 PM Open MInd has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by Open MInd, posted 09-18-2008 6:06 PM Agobot has responded

    
Granny Magda
Member (Idle past 33 days)
Posts: 2284
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007


Message 160 of 213 (482873)
09-18-2008 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by Open MInd
09-18-2008 12:05 AM


Re: Actually Getting Back On-Topic
You did not ask for a proof of G-d's existence.

No I didn't. That would as silly as claiming that I had proof of God's non-existence.

All you asked for was evidence. Therefore, I have told you that everything that exists in the world is evidence of G-d. Theoretically, if nothing existed than there would be no evidence of G-d.

That is nothing more than a massive cop-out. You can't just assert something like that in so vague and unsupported a way. A statement like that effectively says nothing at all. You have merely created an astonishingly crude false dichotomy, that runs something like "If there was nothing there would be no evidence for God, but something does exist, therefore there is evidence for God.", which is a total non-sequitur.

You have interpreted the evidence to mean something else. But, this does not change the evidence.

OK, so how about you explain how your interpretation works. The key point here is how your interpretation of observed reality supports the God hypothesis. It is not enough to merely claim that something (or indeed, everything) is evidence, you need to explain why it is evidence and also demonstrate that your explanation has greater explanatory power than rival interpretations.

Also, it might not hurt to try replying with more than a single paragraph...

Mutate and Survive


"The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." -- Rev. Dr. Francis H. Wade
This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Open MInd, posted 09-18-2008 12:05 AM Open MInd has not yet responded

    
Agobot
Member (Idle past 1997 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 161 of 213 (482874)
09-18-2008 3:17 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by Open MInd
09-17-2008 11:57 PM


Re: A plea
OpenMInd writes:

First of all, you are completely swayed by bias. Second of all, you have not presented a single shred of evidence to disprove the existence of G-d.

There is no way to disprove a negative, you should know that. But what does the Torah say about the dinosaurs? Did God kill them?
What do you think of the idea that an asteroid hit the Yukatan peninsula 65mln years ago and wiped them out, leaving a 300 km crater.
Care to look at an even bigger 340km crater on the Moon?

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1976JBAA...86..471R

Does it sound plausible that such an impact could wipe out the dinosaurs? Do 100 terra tons of TNT sound enough, when you consider the fact that it makes a force equal to 100 000 nuclear bombs? Do you need God to explain their extinction? No, you don't. You don't see a gap here, that's why you creationists don't abuse this topic.

Why is the axis of the Earth tilted? Did God do it only to Earth? Nah, science says there was a big crash between Earth and a fairly large celestial body billions of years ago. As a result of the impact the Earth got tilted(the only planet in the Solar system) and lost a significant part of its volume in the form of dust, some of which got trapped and is still trapped in orbit in the form of a Moon. Could the Torah explain this in a more logical way? Do we need God to explain this perplexing task? No we don't. You won't find gaps here, so it's of no use for you creationists.

What does the Torah say about the Australopithecus in my avatar? Did they have souls and did God send them to Heaven and Hell, or did souls emerge later on?

And so on and so forth, the discoveries of science are virtually endless.

What does the Torah give you besides the obvious comfort of the idea of an eternal life?

Everything about what sciencce has discovered about the creation of the Earth and its history fits so nicely, it's frightening.You just have to open your eyes and be open-minded as your alias states. You may not quite like the truth about reality though.

Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Open MInd, posted 09-17-2008 11:57 PM Open MInd has not yet responded

    
Brian
Member (Idle past 1426 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 162 of 213 (482883)
09-18-2008 4:49 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by bluescat48
09-18-2008 5:54 AM


Re: Actually Getting Back On-Topic
~3000 year old writings.

Being pedantic here :D but their writings are only a little over 2000 years, abd all of them are anonymous.

I dare say that there did exist at one time older writings but we have no way of knowing how simmilar/different they were from the DSS.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by bluescat48, posted 09-18-2008 5:54 AM bluescat48 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 164 by Open MInd, posted 09-18-2008 6:14 PM Brian has responded

    
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 2129 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 163 of 213 (482897)
09-18-2008 6:06 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by Agobot
09-18-2008 10:40 AM


Re: A plea
What is the point of all this? We are not discussing evolution at all. Science has nothing to do with this debate.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by Agobot, posted 09-18-2008 10:40 AM Agobot has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 165 by Agobot, posted 09-18-2008 6:38 PM Open MInd has responded

    
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 2129 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 164 of 213 (482899)
09-18-2008 6:14 PM
Reply to: Message 162 by Brian
09-18-2008 4:49 PM


Re: Actually Getting Back On-Topic
The book of Judges was written by Samuel the prophet. All of the authors are known, and they are written in the Talmud.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by Brian, posted 09-18-2008 4:49 PM Brian has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by Brian, posted 09-19-2008 7:32 AM Open MInd has responded

    
Agobot
Member (Idle past 1997 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 165 of 213 (482903)
09-18-2008 6:38 PM
Reply to: Message 163 by Open MInd
09-18-2008 6:06 PM


Re: A plea
OpenMInd writes:

What is the point of all this? We are not discussing evolution at all. Science has nothing to do with this debate.

All 3 examples were of critical events from Earth's ancient history , not really evolution(the extinction of the dinosaurs, the formtaion of the Moon and the emergence of hominids). All of them being painful, unexplained white spots in the ancient holy books. Miraculously all three being explained by science.

IN FACT, IN THE VERY UNLIKELY EVENT THERE IS A GOD, I CAN BET $1000 THAT SCIENCE WILL DISCOVER EVIDENCE WAY BEFORE ANY OF YOU THEISTS CAN COME UP WITH ANYTHING. In fact, for the last 4 000 years you haven't found any, not even a smell of evidence. This will likely continue into eternity.

Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by Open MInd, posted 09-18-2008 6:06 PM Open MInd has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by Open MInd, posted 09-18-2008 6:58 PM Agobot has responded

    
RewPrev1
...
910
11
12131415Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2014