|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: I Know That God Does Not Exist | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
GDR writes:
I don't think you can even compare Canada and the US. The US is more fanatically fundamentalist but also less inclined to display love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, meekness, temperance. And the Scandinavian nations are pretty secular but they're also pretty good at taking care of their poor and sick.
How about even comparing the US or Canada with any other nation on Earth. GDR writes:
If you measure goodness in terms of cash, the ones with the most cash will seem like the most good. Here is a study in the USChristian vs Secular giving in US All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.5 |
Not all that giving is good.
The preachers getting rich from poor Americans (BBC)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
ringo writes: I don't think you can even compare Canada and the US. The US is more fanatically fundamentalist but also less inclined to display love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, meekness, temperance. And the Scandinavian nations are pretty secular but they're also pretty good at taking care of their poor and sick. OK Here is a Canadian Study Also, we aren't talking about charity that is derived from government. We are talking about what individuals, either on their own or as part of a defined group, do to spend their time and financial assets for the benefit of others.
ringo writes: I'm not at all clear about what point you are trying to make here.
If you measure goodness in terms of cash, the ones with the most cash will seem like the most good.He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
GDR writes:
What on earth are you talking about? You said in Message 991, "I declare that I "know" God exists." and I replied in Message 993, "But you have no evidence." How on earth is a quote from NASA in any way related to what we were talking about?
From this sourceWe have scientific evidence of the this quote. We now have the world that we know with humans possessing consciousness and intelligence. That is quite a leap from one to the other. GDR writes:
Nobody "believes" in string theory. Some people think it's the most promising current hypothesis.
Wouldn't you say that belief in string theory is based on subjective evidence? GDR writes:
Are you suggesting that heat is not an explanation for boiling water? You asked for evidence that we can explain phenomena in terms of natural processes or "blind chance" as you call it. That's what I did. Now the goalposts have moved?
ringo writes:
Just how is that an explanation for deciding to believe that we are solely the result of processes driven by blind chance? ... the evidence suggests that boiling water is caused by heat - take the heat away and the boiling stops. GDR writes:
But it isn't piling processes on processes. It's connecting known processes to known processes. As I said, it's a network, not a hierarchy. There is no ultimate beginning to the network of processes, so there's no need for an infinite regression - like there is for an intelligent cause.
...just like piling process upon process adds turtles to the stack. GDR writes:
It looks like the fundamental forces interacting with each other. You propose a network. Can you explain what that looks like and where it came from? There's no need to speculate about "where it came from". If something "always was" - like your God - then the processes can just as easily be the something that always was.All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8564 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.1
|
I had a different idea on the discussion.
While the particles may be too complex for our complete understanding of their individual properties, as “simple” building blocks left to their combined influences and forces, even more complex macro-structures come into being pretty much all on their own. You and Sarah may be looking on different levels. More complexity built from already staggering complexity.Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
AZPaul3 writes: Sounds like the argument against an intelligent cause for life when such a belief is compared to believing in Santa Claus for example. So your personal incredulity is your argument against the weight of evidence?He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18350 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Sara Bellum, to GDR writes: I would say that it is certainly possible. But I think I understand GDRs point.
You're not going to look at the examples I gave you, of complexity coming from non-intelligent simplicity and then say, "Oh, but these other things couldn't possibly have simple foundations"? Are you?AZPaul3 replying to GDR writes: What specific evidence? Frame the basic issue. The issue is knowing or not knowing whether or not an intelligent Creator exists or could exist. I would submit that Romans 1:18-28 represents the Faith based position fairly adequately. Humans themselves are both simple and complex. We were the first animals to have empathy, yet also the first animals to become aware of the possibility of God and the freedom to reject Him and to attempt to understand reality without Him. Some would call this progress, but (yes, Tangle ) the Jury is still out. Lets look at the simplicity (or complexity) of words and of word definitions, shall we?
So your personal incredulity is your argument against the weight of evidence?Stile writes: I have told everyone before about my philosophy regarding such things. I grew up knowing About God. Everyone can share this same reality, be they atheists who view God as a human mythological construct or be they sheep in one of many fields globally. And yes, we are contrasting belief and knowledge here, but an apologist would submit the idea that Romans 1:18-28 is inspired and explains a world view that was quite educated for the times it was written in. We first start with the assumption that it is possible for us to know anything about the existance we find ourselves in. We then take what data we can find and analyze it. Stile writes: The bottom line is that we are each responsible for the world view that we choose to form. We are not slaves either to faith or to evidence...we can freely use and apply one or both to our individual world views.
I don't simply have a lack of belief in God. I know that God doesn't exist. And I think that my basis is rational.Stile writes: And I would argue that the Bible is data for some. Choice is always our right and our responsibility. I am saying that the statement "I know that God does not exist" is equivalent to the statement "I know that drinking water is good for us."Lots of people can disagree if they'd like... but they are both based on all the data that we have available to us. Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.~Stile
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
GDR writes:
Why not? The vast majority of good that I do for people is through my taxes.
Also, we aren't talking about charity that is derived from government. GDR writes:
It isn't rocket science. Americans give more because they have more, not because they're more religious. ringo writes:
I'm not at all clear about what point you are trying to make here. If you measure goodness in terms of cash, the ones with the most cash will seem like the most good.All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
The phone book is data for some. You can either use it for its intended purpose or you can misuses it. And I would argue that the Bible is data for some.All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8564 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
Sorry, GDR, you lost me.
I know that's easy to do and getting easier every day, but... what?Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18350 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
AZPaul3 writes: Which leads me down several rabbit trails, as I too have a different idea on "the discussion" and what specifically we are collectively trying to express.
I had a different idea on the discussion.While the particles may be too complex for our complete understanding of their individual properties, as “simple” building blocks left to their combined influences and forces, even more complex macro-structures come into being pretty much all on their own. Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.~Stile
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18350 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Which then leads to the question (and/or presumption) that the Bible has a specific intended purpose.
Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.~Stile
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18350 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
ringo writes: Ahhh yes. Money makes the world go around, the world go around, the world go around. The vast majority of good that I do for people is through my taxes. I would argue that human empathy (and action) go a lot further than mere tax dollars or spare change in the collection plate. I concede, however, that I am taking us off topic.
Americans give more because they have more, not because they're more religious. I observe that Americans seem to prefer throwing money at problems rather than getting personally involved.Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.~Stile
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
Well, that's the point. Believers treat the Bible as if it had an intended purpose. They might just as well use the phone book to predict lottery numbers. Which then leads to the question (and/or presumption) that the Bible has a specific intended purpose.All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
I predict that you'll lose that argument but go ahead and make it. Or is it just another one of your assertions?
I would argue that human empathy (and action) go a lot further than mere tax dollars or spare change in the collection plate. Phat writes:
Exactly. I observe that Americans seem to prefer throwing money at problems rather than getting personally involved.All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024