Author Topic: Question [#2616]  (Read 4902 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online lotanddaughters

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 612
  • Darwins +48/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • Artist: Simon Vouet (1633)
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #29 on: November 14, 2011, 10:18:36 PM »
At least the Bible holds true to this day!

If the Bible was true, then I would simply know that it was true. I have no reason to deny that it is true, other than the fact that it obviously isn't true. If I thought there was any chance that the Creator of the universe wanted me to follow the rules that are littered throughout the Bible, I would make an attempt to follow them. The problem is, since there are contradictions with many of these rules, I would be simultaneously breaking a rule by following another.

Does it make sense that there is a singular Creator of the universe that is male, and this all-knowing male Creator behaved the way he supposedly did in the Bible?

Or, does it make sense that the Bible is a mythological collection of books created from the imaginations of ancient men?
Enough with your bullshit.
. . . Mr. Friday . . . that post really is golden.

Offline Emily

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5663
  • Darwins +49/-0
  • Gender: Female
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #30 on: November 14, 2011, 10:53:01 PM »
Nah,  Bible hasn't changed.

Science has and will continue too.  Have neutrinos traveled faster than the speed of light?  Blowing Einstein out of the water?   I asked this a long time ago with no answer.  But, this was allegedly observed between CERN and someplace in Italy.

Is your guy Ager all wet?  I asked this a long time ago with no answer and he's your guy (at least last we knew he was an atheist).

Is it Spurgeon, Scofield?

Uniformitarianism or Catastrophic?

Panspermia or evolution?  What does Hawkings believe?

Huh?? and you claim to have it all figured out???   Oh, I forgot, Its science by poll of scientists....whatever "most" scientists believe.    Ahhhh, excuse me!
 
At least the Bible holds true to this day!

So you'd rather have all the 'answers' instead of have the excitement of reading Science Daily or National Geographic finding out there was a new breakthrough. What a boring life that must be. One of my favorite parts about science is that it's on a never-ending quest for knowledge, and whether that knowledge adds to current discoveries, or takes away, who cares - it's still exciting. But the bible. There is no truth in those pages. And when asked for proof or evidence of the claimed truths believers just run away. For science. Science at least has thousands and millions of papers to support its findings, as well as many who both support those findings and are skeptical about it.

Even if Einstein is proven wrong at least at one point in the history of civilizations the knowledge and tools that Einstein had to work with supported what he had shown.

I really don't know how to put it, but life is a lot better  without having all the answers, It's pretty cool to think that in 20 years more discoveries are made and more theories are formulated. Sorry you have no respect for it.

If you actually know what the word theory means in science at the very center of the definition is a phrase synonymous with change.

Theory
A scientifically testable general principle or body of principles offered to explain observed phenomena. In scientific usage, a theory is distinct from a hypothesis (or conjecture) that is proposed to explain previously observed phenomena. For a hypothesis to rise to the level of theory, it must predict the existence of new phenomena that are subsequently observed. A theory can be overturned if new phenomena are observed that directly contradict the theory.
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/site/glossary.html

Sorry, but science has the bible beat hands down. Change is a good thing.

Quote
But, this was allegedly observed between CERN and someplace in Italy

and if I am correct the LHC has not reached the speed of light yet. It has reached speeds close to it, but is haven't reached speeds of 299,792,458 meters per second yet.

How do you know if your ever changing theories have finally gotten it right?

I just noticed this. Sorry, but you're an idiot. So far the big bang theory and the theory of evolution are the best theories as to how the universe began and how species has evolved. Nothing wrong with them ever changing. In 20 years our technology will evolve and we will we more equipt to support those theories by providing a better way of experimentation in the laboratory, which in turn makes them change. So far nothing has been able to prove those theories wrong. If you've got one, provide it. The genesis story doesn't count - unless, of course, you can provide evidence that's testable and verifiable.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2011, 11:40:07 PM by Emily »
"Great moments are born from great opportunities." Herb Brooks

I edit a lot of my posts. The reason being it to add content or to correct grammar/wording. All edits to remove wording get a strike through through the wording.

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7275
  • Darwins +170/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #31 on: November 14, 2011, 11:12:24 PM »
Jt...this is an adult forum.  Please stop replying like a 10 year old.  Seriously.

Online Dante

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2174
  • Darwins +70/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • Hedonist Extraordinaire
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #32 on: November 14, 2011, 11:57:40 PM »
As far as the CERN experiment is concerned, it's jot yet been proven that nuetrinos can exceed C. And if it is proven, so what? There's another great dicovery that helps us understand more about our universe. Yet you have contempt for it. I suspect it's because it keeps pressing your god further and further into the gaps.

Or, possibly you believe that your god somehow made these particles break our known laws of physics just to prove his existence?
« Last Edit: November 15, 2011, 12:12:39 AM by Dante »
Actually it doesn't. One could conceivably be all-powerful but not exceptionally intelligent.

Offline Historicity

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2350
  • Darwins +80/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • (Rama, avatar of Vishnu)
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #33 on: November 15, 2011, 01:20:45 AM »
I searched and I read articles on the internet but I have never found a description of the CERN experiment.

I have seen a real physicist give an explanation of what a neutrino is as if speaking to a child and then fill the article with blather.

Was it a burst or a series of bursts like a rhythm?  Mechanically, how were the burst(s) created?  How were the burst(s) detected and timed?  Could a wave of neutrinos from a nova have struck the earth coincidentally?  Or activity from another reactor?  Or the sun?

What?

Offline Ivellios

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1077
  • Darwins +52/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Seek and Ye Shall Find
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #34 on: November 15, 2011, 02:44:45 AM »
Nah,  Bible hasn't changed.

So the bible has been the same way since God gave it to Adam & Eve? Which is, of course, the way an All Knowing, All Powerful, All Loving, Perfect God would have done it. Otherwise it is, by default, "Ever changing." Especially if there are different parts with different authors... translators and errors and such... different versions, ie. KJV NIV Catholic etc ad infinitum... You know why each and every version of the Bible is copyrighted right? It is said you cannot copyright the word of God, but each and evey one are different enough that they can sell for profit and not taken to court for plagerism.

Somebody's in Denial. It isn't me.

<snip>

 &)


Huh?? and you claim to have it all figured out???

So you know everything there is to know, just like every christian... yet instead of helping out you let humanity stumble along trying to reinvent the wheel. Why don't you impart that flawless knowledge you have on everything there is to know about neutinos? Atoms, Protons, Electrons, DNA, the cure for cancer, alzheimers.

Oh wait you can't because you don't know ****. You claim to know all the answers, which you are claiming by asking this question. So either put up your own research papers that are proved with actual proof. Because if you are not claiming to know all the answers... then you are just a person in the dark yelling at someone making a light bulb, trying to make them stop. That there's no point since they don't know EVERYTHING THERE IS TO KNOW. A state that is impossible.

   Oh, I forgot, Its science by poll of scientists....whatever "most" scientists believe.    Ahhhh, excuse me!

Science isn't a Democracy. It isn't a Theocracy. Some changes are slow, and others may take a long time but science goes to the facts, and remember the thing to know the difference between a truth and a lie is the facts.

You use science every day. Science humans gave us, not your God. The only times you have problems with science is a factor that the truth doesn't give a shit about your feelings and finding out the truth hurt. You really should read the Bible and find out the type of god you really worship. Ah, right... willfully ignorant because you don't want to know the truth. A chapter a day makes YHWH go away.

At least the Bible holds true to this day!

Another person that thinks the Earth is flat. /sigh 

Yes, the Bible says the Earth is flat. You would have known that if you read it, instead of only the verses you're "supposed to."
« Last Edit: November 15, 2011, 02:47:18 AM by TruthSeeker »

Online Aaron123

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2733
  • Darwins +77/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #35 on: November 15, 2011, 04:38:15 AM »

My god is a deistic god. One that I cannot prove to you, only myself. But again, I did not create a website devoted to disproving the Christian god or any god and I am not required to prove that my God exists. I am only pointing out the flaws in the argument on this website. While it does have some great points, I feel certain points are flawed in that they claim something that has yet been unproven.  ie, having a million people pray for a limb to grow back.

How convenient.  You can't and won't prove that your god exists, but it's "wrong" for someone else to make an unproven claim.

Really, it's hard to take seriously that you're "not required to prove that [my claim] exists", but a couple sentence later, say that someone's else ideas "are flawed in that [their claim] are unproven".  Which is it?  Are we required to prove our claims or not?  If we're required to prove our claims, then it's only fair that you're required to prove yours.  If you're not required to prove your claims, then why should we be required?
Being a Christian, I've made my decision. That decision offers no compromise; therefore, I'm closed to anything else.

Offline hickdive

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 914
  • Darwins +32/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #36 on: November 15, 2011, 05:46:04 AM »
What if we could get one sincere believer in the christian deity to pray for the restoration of one amputee's limb? Would that work? If not, is its failure a function of only having one sincere believer praying? How about if we had two or three or a million or a trillion? At what point would you accept that sufficient people had been involved in praying for a valid experimental outcome to be observed?
 
The 'million people' is simply a thought experiment. You know, with as much certainty as anything can be known, that no-one has ever demonstrably had their limb restored by prayer. Suggesting that the more people are involved in prayer the greater the chance of success is merely a vehicle for illustrating the absurdity of belief in prayer.
 
You are, of course, correct in that this only excludes deities that are alleged to respond to prayer. However, if a deist is someone that believes in an entity that created the universe, for reasons unknown, and then buggered off then what benefit is gained by even just believing in this being? If a deist is someone who believes that an entity created the universe and simply observes without intervening then again what benefit is gained by believing? In either case you may as well be an atheist. On the other hand if someone styles themselves a deist in that they believe in an intervening god but not the christian version then you are still left with the fact that prayer demonstrably does not work. In which case, where does that leave an intervening deity? You're left with the Epicurean paradox;
 
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”
Stupidity, unlike intelligence, has no limits.

Online Dante

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2174
  • Darwins +70/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • Hedonist Extraordinaire
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #37 on: November 15, 2011, 07:48:51 AM »
I searched and I read articles on the internet but I have never found a description of the CERN experiment.

I have seen a real physicist give an explanation of what a neutrino is as if speaking to a child and then fill the article with blather.

Was it a burst or a series of bursts like a rhythm?  Mechanically, how were the burst(s) created?  How were the burst(s) detected and timed?  Could a wave of neutrinos from a nova have struck the earth coincidentally?  Or activity from another reactor?  Or the sun?

What?

Supercollider stuff. Timed with GPS, evidently, and they were nanoseconds ahead of the speed of light. Of course, the results have yet to be verified, and the scientistific community, as is their want, is highly skeptical.

http://www.engadget.com/2011/10/17/remember-those-faster-than-light-neutrinos-great-now-forget-e/

Also, search keywords "OPERA experiment" for a ton of info.
Actually it doesn't. One could conceivably be all-powerful but not exceptionally intelligent.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12130
  • Darwins +646/-27
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #38 on: November 15, 2011, 08:04:39 AM »
Nah,  Bible hasn't changed.

Science has and will continue too.  Have neutrinos traveled faster than the speed of light?  Blowing Einstein out of the water?   I asked this a long time ago with no answer.  But, this was allegedly observed between CERN and someplace in Italy.

Is your guy Ager all wet?  I asked this a long time ago with no answer and he's your guy (at least last we knew he was an atheist).

Is it Spurgeon, Scofield?

Uniformitarianism or Catastrophic?

Panspermia or evolution?  What does Hawkings believe?

Huh?? and you claim to have it all figured out???   Oh, I forgot, Its science by poll of scientists....whatever "most" scientists believe.    Ahhhh, excuse me!
 
At least the Bible holds true to this day!


Before I comment on this supremely dumb post, I'd like to know, what is your point?  If I were to guess, I would say your point is the bible is right (about everything) and science is useless.  But I don't like guessing, especially when I can ask a question and get it clarified.


Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 15420
  • Darwins +169/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #39 on: November 15, 2011, 09:38:46 AM »
I assure you that I am not Christian. I was raised as one but never truly accepted it. I merely see a flaw in the argument on this website and thought I would write them. I didn't realize it would be put into a forum. I am willing and desire the truth. I don't see how this site can claim there is no God based on an experiement that THEY HAVE NOT TESTED!!

But you do anything to avoid telling me what you consider yourself to be.  How interesting and how unsurprising.   

All I see is a theist who is desperately putting off the inevitable.  You have been educated on the reason for the example.  You ignore it.  You insist that this experiment should be done since it supposedly could prove that God exists.  That a million people praying for one thing could make a difference.  Well, let me ask you, do you think that millions of people were praying for the folks in the 9/11 tragedy would survive?  Did that make a difference?  No.  So, your desire to claim that quanitity might make a difference fails. 

Your claims also simply ignore anything you want.  The bible says that only one person has to pray.  You want to come up with another variable.  So, is the bible wrong?  If it’s wrong about this, what else is it wrong about?  What about every other supposed “holy” book?  IF you are a theist, but not a Christain, what do you base your belief in?  Something you’ve made up yourself?   
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 15420
  • Darwins +169/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #40 on: November 15, 2011, 09:40:00 AM »
How do you know if your ever changing theories have finally gotten it right?

gee, I guess jtp, never uses computers or modern medicine or anythign else that uses those theories.   Love to see the hypocrisy, jtp!  Keep going!

Quote
Nah,  Bible hasn't changed.

Science has and will continue too.  Have neutrinos traveled faster than the speed of light?  Blowing Einstein out of the water?   I asked this a long time ago with no answer.  But, this was allegedly observed between CERN and someplace in Italy.

Is your guy Ager all wet?  I asked this a long time ago with no answer and he's your guy (at least last we knew he was an atheist).
quite a lie right here since I answered this right here: http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,20234.msg453366.html#msg453366 .  How sad that you must return to your lies as a dog to its vomit.   

Quote
Is it Spurgeon, Scofield?

Uniformitarianism or Catastrophic?

Panspermia or evolution?  What does Hawkings believe?

Huh?? and you claim to have it all figured out???   Oh, I forgot, Its science by poll of scientists....whatever "most" scientists believe.    Ahhhh, excuse me!
 
At least the Bible holds true to this day!
except where it fails.  Like in all of the examples given to you, and you keep lying about the same old things.  How cute. 


mod: fixed quote
« Last Edit: November 15, 2011, 12:15:23 PM by screwtape »
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline RobotBeeps

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #41 on: November 15, 2011, 01:40:52 PM »

My god is a deistic god. One that I cannot prove to you, only myself. But again, I did not create a website devoted to disproving the Christian god or any god and I am not required to prove that my God exists. I am only pointing out the flaws in the argument on this website. While it does have some great points, I feel certain points are flawed in that they claim something that has yet been unproven.  ie, having a million people pray for a limb to grow back.

How convenient.  You can't and won't prove that your god exists, but it's "wrong" for someone else to make an unproven claim.

Really, it's hard to take seriously that you're "not required to prove that [my claim] exists", but a couple sentence later, say that someone's else ideas "are flawed in that [their claim] are unproven".  Which is it?  Are we required to prove our claims or not?  If we're required to prove our claims, then it's only fair that you're required to prove yours.  If you're not required to prove your claims, then why should we be required?

I have admitted I can't prove my claim. I am not makig any excuses for it. I think it's very probable that there is no god. I don't see any way there can be a Christian god. For right now, I am a deist. So there you go. I'm honest, I can't prove my claim.

This website makes a claim but does not prove it's claim and does not even attempt to do so. Are you really going to tell me you can't see the difference in my position and the website's?

Offline RobotBeeps

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #42 on: November 15, 2011, 01:48:56 PM »
I assure you that I am not Christian. I was raised as one but never truly accepted it. I merely see a flaw in the argument on this website and thought I would write them. I didn't realize it would be put into a forum. I am willing and desire the truth. I don't see how this site can claim there is no God based on an experiement that THEY HAVE NOT TESTED!!

But you do anything to avoid telling me what you consider yourself to be.  How interesting and how unsurprising.   

All I see is a theist who is desperately putting off the inevitable.  You have been educated on the reason for the example.  You ignore it.  You insist that this experiment should be done since it supposedly could prove that God exists.  That a million people praying for one thing could make a difference.  Well, let me ask you, do you think that millions of people were praying for the folks in the 9/11 tragedy would survive?  Did that make a difference?  No.  So, your desire to claim that quanitity might make a difference fails. 
I've said that I'm currently a deist. I am open to truth. And quite frankly, this website has much logic in it. I think they have some things to work on is all. The point is, I didn't make the original claim of quantity makes a difference, the website did. Alll I'm asking for is proof that the claim was TESTED. If you are going to claim that a million people praying for a limb to grow back doesn't work you and therefore discredits Christiantity, you better have the evidence to back it up.  This doesn't mean I'm secretly a thiest. I just want those loose ends tied up.

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 15420
  • Darwins +169/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #43 on: November 15, 2011, 01:57:53 PM »
I've said that I'm currently a deist. I am open to truth. And quite frankly, this website has much logic in it. I think they have some things to work on is all. The point is, I didn't make the original claim of quantity makes a difference, the website did. Alll I'm asking for is proof that the claim was TESTED. If you are going to claim that a million people praying for a limb to grow back doesn't work you and therefore discredits Christiantity, you better have the evidence to back it up.  This doesn't mean I'm secretly a thiest. I just want those loose ends tied up.

Thanks for doing that, you are a deist and therefore a theist.  And again, you avoid the point.  Amazing. 

The website says
Quote
If possible, get millions of people all over the planet to join the prayer circle and pray their most fervent prayers. Get millions of people praying in unison for a single miracle for this one deserving amputee. Then stand back and watch.
What is going to happen? Jesus clearly says that if you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer. He does not say it once -- he says it many times in many ways in the Bible.
And yet, even with millions of people praying, nothing will happen.
No matter how many people pray. No matter how sincere those people are. No matter how much they believe. No matter how devout and deserving the recipient. Nothing will happen. The legs will not regenerate. Prayer does not restore the severed limbs of amputees. You can electronically search through all the medical journals ever written -- there is no documented case of an amputated leg being restored spontaneously. And we know that God ignores the prayers of amputees through our own observations of the world around us. If God were answering the prayers of amputees to regenerate their lost limbs, we would be seeing amputated legs growing back every day.
 
In that prayer never works, the number of people praying will not make a difference.  As I stated in my last post, do you really think that millions of people haven’t been praying for one thing at any time in history?  In that I can make a safe assumption that they have (another example is when some important figure has been the victim of an assassination attempt, Kennedy, Gandhi, the pope, Reagan, etc), your demand for the experiment to be done is moot and the “loose ends” are tied up.  Prayers don’t work, no matter the number.  People live and die and without regard to someone trying bother some sort of deity.

If there is a god, why would it care about the subject of the prayer?  Marshall Brain points out that prayers never are fulfilled for amputees.  The god invoked can only perform for parlor tricks and coincidence evidently.  Not much of a omnipotent, omniscienet god at all. 
« Last Edit: November 15, 2011, 02:01:09 PM by velkyn »
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #44 on: November 15, 2011, 02:04:43 PM »
I assure you that I am not Christian. I was raised as one but never truly accepted it. I merely see a flaw in the argument on this website and thought I would write them. I didn't realize it would be put into a forum. I am willing and desire the truth. I don't see how this site can claim there is no God based on an experiement that THEY HAVE NOT TESTED!!

But you do anything to avoid telling me what you consider yourself to be.  How interesting and how unsurprising.   

All I see is a theist who is desperately putting off the inevitable.  You have been educated on the reason for the example.  You ignore it.  You insist that this experiment should be done since it supposedly could prove that God exists.  That a million people praying for one thing could make a difference.  Well, let me ask you, do you think that millions of people were praying for the folks in the 9/11 tragedy would survive?  Did that make a difference?  No.  So, your desire to claim that quanitity might make a difference fails. 
I've said that I'm currently a deist. I am open to truth. And quite frankly, this website has much logic in it. I think they have some things to work on is all. The point is, I didn't make the original claim of quantity makes a difference, the website did. Alll I'm asking for is proof that the claim was TESTED. If you are going to claim that a million people praying for a limb to grow back doesn't work you and therefore discredits Christiantity, you better have the evidence to back it up.  This doesn't mean I'm secretly a thiest. I just want those loose ends tied up.

I used to be a Deist. The only logical fault in Deism is an appeal to ignorance. Every other brand of theism has far more. The question, WWGHA, does absolutely nothing, not one single thing, to undermine the concept of a Deist god. Even though I was an atheist long before I came to this site, I noticed that the very first day. WWGHA only destroys the concept of the traditional monotheist tri-omni. It doesn't do much but a slight undermining of most pagan lines of theism.

You are right that it does make that claim. Yes. However, the dots are not difficult to connect, as my previous statement illustrates. It is a matter of informal, rather than formal, logic. Often when faced with a nebulous line of thinking, a quasi-unfalsifiable premise, informal logic is what a person is forced to rely on.





 
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Online Aaron123

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2733
  • Darwins +77/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #45 on: November 15, 2011, 02:34:55 PM »
I have admitted I can't prove my claim. I am not makig any excuses for it. I think it's very probable that there is no god. I don't see any way there can be a Christian god. For right now, I am a deist. So there you go. I'm honest, I can't prove my claim.

In which case, why believe in a god?  As you said, god is unprovable.


Quote
This website makes a claim but does not prove it's claim and does not even attempt to do so. Are you really going to tell me you can't see the difference in my position and the website's?

The claim in question is really only an extention of a statement that the site already made and demostrated; one prayer will not result in an amputee's limbs being restored.  Ten people praying will not result in that amputee's limbs being restored.  Dozens of people prayings will not... etc etc.  Basically, it's saying that since there's no evidence of prayer working on a small scale, then it stands to reasons that prayer will not work on a large scale.
Being a Christian, I've made my decision. That decision offers no compromise; therefore, I'm closed to anything else.

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6381
  • Darwins +817/-5
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #46 on: November 15, 2011, 04:12:19 PM »
No matter what a theist says about gods, prayer, science or whatever, the proof of what they really believe is in their actions, not their words. In the quiet of the night inside their own heads, they all know how they would respond to these scenarios, no matter what they say in an internet forum. They may not be honest with us, but they have to be honest with themselves.

1)If your two toddlers were hit by a car and had serious internal injuries, would you want them to be taken to
a)a church where the anti-evolution pastor can pray for the children to be magically knit back together by Jesus (or your preferred diety);
or
b) a hospital where there are atheist doctors trained in evolution-based biological science

2) When deciding whether to eat a particular food, do you
a)open up the bible (or your preferred sacred text) and find the part that relates closest to the food you want to eat and do whatever it says;
or
b) rely on the secular governmental inspection process that uses scientific germ theory

3) If you could live wherever you wanted, would you choose
a) a strict religion-based community where everyone is expected to live according to the rules of the bible (or your preferred sacred text);
or
b) a secular community where people can live by whatever private beliefs they want as long as they agree to follow basic non-religious laws in public

4) Your college age kid is to live on a deserted island for a year with a group of randomly selected people. Would you rather the group have
a) a copy of your preferred sacred text
or
b) a practical science-based book, written by atheists, on how to survive on a deserted island with a group of people

5) Would you rather have your country led by
a) a person who hears the voice of god speaking, and does whatever the voice says
or
b) a person who has no religious beliefs and makes decisions after studying the evidence and consulting with trained experts

When religious people choose
a)mythical supernatural beings and make-believe over b)science and rational thought in everyday practical situations, they are being honest and consistent. They are not hypocrites.

They are the people who pray over their seriously ill relatives instead of getting them medical attention. They are the people who think it is a good thing to fly planes into buildings full of people. They are people who bomb other countries because god's voice told them to. They are people who drown their children to keep them from going to hell.

People in modern societies (even most religious people) consider them dangerously crazy extremists. Luckily, the vast majority of religious people are lying hypocrites.

Modified per pesky bitchin' and moanin' intelligent constructive criticism.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2011, 05:14:14 PM by nogodsforme »
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Online jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4754
  • Darwins +540/-13
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #47 on: November 15, 2011, 04:58:18 PM »
nogodsforme:  You need to be consistent in how you frame your answers.  If you're going to say something's atheist, say it for all of the answers; same with saying something's secular or non-religious.  I understand the shock value in referring to something as 'atheist', but it might work better if you refer to it in all of the answers.

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6381
  • Darwins +817/-5
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #48 on: November 15, 2011, 05:09:06 PM »
nogodsforme:  You need to be consistent in how you frame your answers.  If you're going to say something's atheist, say it for all of the answers; same with saying something's secular or non-religious.  I understand the shock value in referring to something as 'atheist', but it might work better if you refer to it in all of the answers.

I guess I meant would a religious person take their kid to an atheist doctor who would save the kid's life, or to a pastor who would not. The science book that would enable the teen to survive on the island is written by atheists. The government references, however, should say secular. You are right.
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #49 on: November 15, 2011, 09:42:20 PM »


Sorry that boil down to the fact that 14 billion have ever lived on this planet, 7 billion are dead. A great deal of the were theist...lets say around 85%. It would folly to say that at least half prayed at some point not to die or not have a relative die....yet 7 billion are dead. It doesn't take that much of a leap that this would extend to missing limbs.

It may disprove Christianity, but not God.

Not quite, it disproves the tri-omni model of God, but not Pagan or Deist models.
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2693
  • Darwins +218/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburger™
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #50 on: November 16, 2011, 12:17:02 AM »
Err... the phallacy of a positive result of the experiment is that if millions of people pray, then you never know if just one of them is Uri Gellar or Derren Brown and could do it by himself, but it would be interesting to track him down. Also, you don't know if people have praying power that could exist in its own right, sans God.


JTP: the reason that Bible does not change, is that people do not change it because they know they will get caught doing it. Recent changes include Joseph Smith, but somehow he got away with it, even though it's obvious. If you want to know if the Bible is unchanging, then do the experiment of erasing historical documents and people's memory, and then see how long it takes before some new sect revises half of it. If people were of a mood to accept a changing book with no historical lineage, then people would change the Bible any time they felt like it. However, the only authority the Bible has is based upon how little it varies, rather than whether it's correct or not. For example, this text I just wrote will not change, but it doesn't mean I was correct.

EDIT. OK I changed it a bit, but I did not get caught. Nobody saw me doing it, and the edit notice under this is just my enemy interpolating lines after-the-fact. It's not part of the true gospel of Add Hominem. What I said is basically unchanging, except for this edit, and edits to this edit.






« Last Edit: November 16, 2011, 12:19:50 AM by Add Homonym »
Humans, in general, don't waste any opportunity to be unfathomably stupid - Dr Cynical.

Offline riley2112

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 359
  • Darwins +38/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • learn to laugh at yourself. I am.
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #51 on: November 16, 2011, 04:11:50 PM »
Quote
1)If your two toddlers were hit by a car and had serious internal injuries, would you want them to be taken to
a)a church where the anti-evolution pastor can pray for the children to be magically knit back together by Jesus (or your preferred diety);
or
b) a hospital where there are atheist doctors trained in evolution-based biological science

B

Quote
2) When deciding whether to eat a particular food, do you
a)open up the bible (or your preferred sacred text) and find the part that relates closest to the food you want to eat and do whatever it says;
or
b) rely on the secular governmental inspection process that uses scientific germ theory


neither

Quote
3) If you could live wherever you wanted, would you choose
a) a strict religion-based community where everyone is expected to live according to the rules of the bible (or your preferred sacred text);
or
b) a secular community where people can live by whatever private beliefs they want as long as they agree to follow basic non-religious laws in public

B

Quote
4) Your college age kid is to live on a deserted island for a year with a group of randomly selected people. Would you rather the group have
a) a copy of your preferred sacred text
or
b) a practical science-based book, written by atheists, on how to survive on a deserted island with a group of people

B


Quote
5) Would you rather have your country led by
a) a person who hears the voice of god speaking, and does whatever the voice says
or
b) a person who has no religious beliefs and makes decisions after studying the evidence and consulting with trained experts

B

Quote
When religious people choose
a)mythical supernatural beings and make-believe over b)science and rational thought in everyday practical situations, they are being honest and consistent. They are not hypocrites.
You are saying make believe beings. Make believe beings are not real.



 
Quote
They are the people who pray over their seriously ill relatives instead of getting them medical attention. They are the people who think it is a good thing to fly planes into buildings full of people. They are people who bomb other countries because god's voice told them to. They are people who drown their children to keep them from going to hell.

People in modern societies (even most religious people) consider them dangerously crazy extremists. Luckily, the vast majority of religious people are lying hypocrites.

People pray over their loved ones in the Hospital. People that believe it is a good ideal to fly planes into buildings are terrorist. The people that bomb other countries are most of the time also terrorist that use God as the reason to carry out their own purpose. And if the soldiers refuse to fight they are jailed or shot. Using your own words (even most religious people) consider them dangerously crazy.

I try to understand the beliefs of others. They have the right to believe however they want for whatever reason they may find. I believe .
So you are either calling me a hypocrite or a terrorist.  I find it amusing that most of your time on here is spent talking about a God that you don't believe in or MOCKING the people that do. So if I am to  try and understand the reason behind it. It seems to be the same reason that many radical religious people have for saying that people that don't believe in a God is evil and absurd. You both are afraid of what the other believes. I an not saying that is a fact , just a thought. Dude there are crazy people out there , that I will agree with. However just because someone believes , does not make them dangerous. But putting all people that does not believe like you, or are not like us, into one bunch and telling other that they are dangerously crazy. That is the true danger. It brings to mind Hitler. Just saying.


.
[/quote]
Most people think they know what they know. The problem starts by not knowing what you don't know. You know?  (Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence)   (Albert Einstein)One fool can ask more questions in a minute than twelve wise men can answer in an hour.
--Nikolai Lenin

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 15420
  • Darwins +169/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #52 on: November 16, 2011, 04:24:58 PM »
People pray over their loved ones in the Hospital. People that believe it is a good ideal to fly planes into buildings are terrorist.
who pray to a god that supposedly was okay with them flying into a building. Both are sure that their god is with them.

Quote
I try to understand the beliefs of others. They have the right to believe however they want for whatever reason they may find. I believe .
This works up to the "end of my nose".  However, many many theists, want to take over my life with their religion.  They aren't terrorists, but they are wanting to control me.  I'm not sure if you're in the US, Riley, but that attitude is rife here.

I generally go with Voltaire's opinion: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.---- Voltaire

All theists create god in their image.  Both use their god as justification. 


* fixed error - Chronos
« Last Edit: November 16, 2011, 07:09:21 PM by Chronos »
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline riley2112

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 359
  • Darwins +38/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • learn to laugh at yourself. I am.
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #53 on: November 16, 2011, 04:45:45 PM »
I am one that lives and lets live. If you believe in a God that is all loving . I am OK with that , If you believe in a God that is all about fire and brimstone. That is your right. If you believe that no God exists and that all thing happen just because it does. That to is your right. At this time I believe in a God that created all. I use to believe in a God that was all good and that was not to long ago. ( like a couple of weeks) It would be nice if everyone was right. But you and I both know they are not. You may be right and no God exists. We don't really know. It is not going to make me feel one way or the other about anyone as to rather they believe in my God , Their God , or no God at all.
   As time goes on and I come in contact with more information I may not believe in a God either, At this time it is hard to tell what the future may bring. ( I guess if I wanted to know I could look in the bible. ;) Got to keep that humor thing going. I just don't want to judge people on a belief that I don't understand. And how can anyone understand truly what my belief means to me or your belief means to you. But to bunch everyone up and make believe that they believe and act the same is absurd. Just common reason would make that a true statement.
 The very thing of all people believing different is the main reason that knowledge continues to grow. People trying to prove others wrong brings new knowledge to us all. OK, prove me wrong , just don't make me look like a terrorist in the process.
Most people think they know what they know. The problem starts by not knowing what you don't know. You know?  (Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence)   (Albert Einstein)One fool can ask more questions in a minute than twelve wise men can answer in an hour.
--Nikolai Lenin

Offline riley2112

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 359
  • Darwins +38/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • learn to laugh at yourself. I am.
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #54 on: November 16, 2011, 04:58:07 PM »
One more thing, people that fly into building or kill people or try to control people would more than likely do those things anyway, If they didn't blame it on a god telling them to do it , then they would blame it on something else. People are who they are. I believe in a God but if I heard a voice telling me to blow up a building, you are still not going to hear about Riley blowing up a building on the 6:00 news. I know you are not going to tell me that there are no criminal out there that don't believe in a god, are you
Most people think they know what they know. The problem starts by not knowing what you don't know. You know?  (Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence)   (Albert Einstein)One fool can ask more questions in a minute than twelve wise men can answer in an hour.
--Nikolai Lenin

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6381
  • Darwins +817/-5
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #55 on: November 16, 2011, 06:03:06 PM »
riley, my point was that many people who say they believe in some sort of all-powerful, all knowing and all good being (god) quickly turn to secular human answers when they know that works better.

Evolution is evil but I get a flu shot. Science is bad but I use a computer and a cell phone. Prayer works, except when it doesn't--then I turn to evil human science. God never grows a severed arm back, but instead of accepting god's will that I have no arm, I get the prosthetic arm created by science. That is hypocritical. But it is human and understandable.

The people who stick by god no matter what, even if it means their kid dies because they used prayer instead of the hospital, we consider them dangerous and crazy. People who do whatever god says, even if god tells them to blow up a health clinic, or drown their kids, are dangerous and crazy. But they are not hypocrites.

BTW, did you call me a dude? I am so not a dude you would not believe it. A man shaped like I am would never leave the house.
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline Brakeman

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1243
  • Darwins +47/-3
  • Gender: Male
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #56 on: November 16, 2011, 06:10:09 PM »
One more thing, people that fly into building or kill people or try to control people would more than likely do those things anyway,..

No! They wouldn't! The 9 Saudi hijackers of 9/11 were fighting a terrorist war to force the infidels out of Saudi Arabia, their holy land that houses Meca, for purely religious reasons.
It was NOT because they hated our freedoms or any other right wing lie. And it was a successful war for Bin Ladin and his Saudi crew, America did capitulate and removed all us troops out of Saudi Arabia.
Bin Laden claimed he would have been happy to die to remove the unbelieving American infidels from his holy land and if you could have asked him just before he died, he would have undoubtedly smiled at his success.

If you took religion out of the equation, Bin Laden would have wanted more tourist dollars for his country and wouldn't even have started a petition. How simple can it be?
Help find the cure for FUNDAMENTIA !

Offline riley2112

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 359
  • Darwins +38/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • learn to laugh at yourself. I am.
Re: Question [#2616]
« Reply #57 on: November 16, 2011, 06:41:12 PM »
riley, my point was that many people who say they believe in some sort of all-powerful, all knowing and all good being (god) quickly turn to secular human answers when they know that works better.

Evolution is evil but I get a flu shot. Science is bad but I use a computer and a cell phone. Prayer works, except when it doesn't--then I turn to evil human science. God never grows a severed arm back, but instead of accepting god's will that I have no arm, I get the prosthetic arm created by science. That is hypocritical. But it is human and understandable.

The people who stick by god no matter what, even if it means their kid dies because they used prayer instead of the hospital, we consider them dangerous and crazy. People who do whatever god says, even if god tells them to blow up a health clinic, or drown their kids, are dangerous and crazy. But they are not hypocrites.

BTW, did you call me a dude? I am so not a dude you would not believe it. A man shaped like I am would never leave the house.
I understand the point you are trying to make, I guess that is just a little to black and white for me. There is a lot of gray area in there. One could say ( and I am not saying that is the way it is) that God gave humans the ability to learn the knowledge to have the flu shot , the computer the cell phone ect. And I am so sorry for calling you a Dude. My mistake totally. ;)
Most people think they know what they know. The problem starts by not knowing what you don't know. You know?  (Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence)   (Albert Einstein)One fool can ask more questions in a minute than twelve wise men can answer in an hour.
--Nikolai Lenin