Question [#2616]

[riley2112]

Thank you, thank you. That is why I love coming here. I can throw things at you that has been throw at me or that I come across and you pick it apart showing me things that I have not thought of. Two minds are better than one . Thank you.

[Gnu Ordure]

Hey, Riley, how are you doin'? Thanks for your PM's.

If you don't mind me saying so, it seems to me you're doing OK. You appear to be listening to and considering what people are saying to you. You've been consistently polite, and you've maintained good humour. And you've kept to the Forum rules of debate and thus not required the attention of the Moderators.

Well done. Seriously. Most of our theist visitors don't do this. So, respect.



Now, this fine-tuning argument, I'm going to join in on your side, to some extent. In my opinion, the argument is suggestive of something, and is worthy of consideration.

And in fact, physicists of the calibre of Penrose, Hawking and Weinberg have considered and written about the question. And it hasn't been answered.

Some people postulate the [wiki]Anthropic Principle[/wiki], but in my opinion it has no explanatory value - obviously we observe conditions condusive to human life, how could we do otherwise? But that still doesn't explain why those conditions exist...

Velkyn:

that’s the old  fine-tuning or “goldilocks”  argument, that there has to be a god that wants the universe “perfect” for us.

The fine-tuning argument doesn't mention God. That's a christian add-on. Wiki defines FT thus:

The fine-tuned universe is the proposition that the conditions that allow life in the Universe can only occur when certain universal fundamental physical constants lie within a very narrow range, so that if any of several fundamental constants were only slightly different the universe would be unlikely to be conducive to the establishment and development of matter, astronomical structures, elemental diversity, or life as it is presently understood.[1] The existence and extent of fine-tuning in the universe is a matter of dispute in the scientific community.

No mention of God there. And the question persists, why do the physical constants of the universe have the values they do?

Nogods:

some viruses that can survive being frozen and thawed, even some bacteria that can survive on rocks in space. They don't seem to need nearly the amount of "fine-tuning" that we humans do.

They depend on baryonic matter and the 118 elements which compose it.

And baryonic matter comprises only 5% of the universe.

So humans and space viruses (and the rocks they live on) are similarly fine-tuned at the atomic level. 

Paul Davies, in his book [wiki]The Goldilocks Enigma[/wiki], reviews the current state of the fine tuning debate in detail, and concludes by enumerating the following responses to that debate (wiki):

1. The absurd universe : Our universe just happens to be the way it is.
 
2. The unique universe : There is a deep underlying unity in physics which necessitates the universe being the way it is. Some Theory of Everything will explain why the various features of the Universe must have exactly the values that we see.

3. The multiverse : Multiple Universes exist, having all possible combinations of characteristics, and we inevitably find ourselves within a Universe that allows us to exist.

4. Creationism : A creator designed the Universe with the purpose of supporting complexity and the emergence of Intelligence.

5. The life principle : There is an underlying principle that constrains the universe to evolve towards life and mind.
 
6. The self-explaining universe : A closed explanatory or causal loop: "perhaps only universes with a capacity for consciousness can exist." This is Wheeler's Participatory Anthropic Principle (PAP).

7. The fake universe : We live inside a virtual reality simulation.

Pick a number...

 

[riley2112]

Thank you , I do try to be polite when  I am visiting someone's place. I may have started out a bit , let's say rough, but I try to learn as quick as I can. Oh, and I pick number 4.

[Ivellios]

<snip>

No mention of God there. And the question persists, why do the physical constants of the universe have the values they do?

Good question.

Why do objects in a wieghtless vacuum exert a force causing them to close the gap between them even though, at the start[1], they cannot physically interact with each other?

1.	and for others, ever

[Dante]

Gnu said:

No mention of God there. And the question persists, why do the physical constants of the universe have the values they do?

Why? Why not? Especially in regards to our existence. Were the universe differently constructed, life may, or may not, also be different were life to exist at all.

Seems like navel gazing to me, but i will take the time to read some of the links you've provided.

BTW, riley, Gnu's praises of your attitude are seconded by me. Welcome to the forum.

[Gnu Ordure]

Oh, and I pick number 4. 

But you don't have to pick, Riley. Davies missed off option 8: Heck, I dunno. 

But, you pick number 4.

So, why do you do that? They're all possible, so why choose that one?

Clue: the purpose of organized religion is to provide a comprehensive coherent narrative of humanity, answering all the 'why' questions - regardless of whether those answers are verifiable - because people want answers.

So consider option 8, Riley: you don't know why the universe exists, you never will know, and you'll die without finding out.

You may not like this, you may resist the idea that your knowledge is limited... but the fact is, you don't know everything. And you never will.

Can you live with that?

The wise man admits his ignorance.

The fool doesn't.

[riley2112]

Gnu Ordure;
There are many reasons , some are just faith that I am doing what I FEEL is right inside. Of course those are not reason enough to really talk about at this time. There are others that think that it may be possible. And being possible makes it thinkable. I found this of great interest. I would love to hear any thought you may have on it.

Intelligence leaves behind a characteristic trademark or signature — what I call “specified complexity.” An event exhibits specified complexity if it is contingent and therefore not necessary; if it is complex and therefore not easily repeatable by chance; and if it is specified in the sense of exhibiting an independently given pattern. Note that complexity in the sense of improbability is not sufficient to eliminate chance: flip a coin long enough, and you'll witness a highly complex or improbable event. Even so, you'll have no reason not to attribute it to chance.

Specifications must be objectively given.The important thing about specifications is that they be objectively given and not just imposed on events after the fact. For instance, if an archer shoots arrows into a wall and we then paint bull’s-eyes around them, we impose a pattern after the fact. On the other hand, if the targets are set up in advance (“specified”) and then the archer hits them accurately, we know it was by design. In my book The Design Inference, I argue that specified complexity reliably detects design. In that book, however, I focus largely on examples from the human rather than the natural sciences. The main criticism of that work to date concerns whether the Darwinian mechanism of natural selection and random variation is not in fact fully capable of generating specified complexity. More recently, in No Free Lunch, I show that undirected natural processes like the Darwinian mechanism are incapable of generating the specified complexity that exists in biological organisms. It follows that chance and necessity are insufficient for the natural sciences and that the natural sciences need to leave room for design.( William A. Dembski)

and you are right that I don't know how the universe exist, I don't know why Angela puts up with me, and I don't know how to make home made bread. Granted , if I tried I could more than likely find out the last two. But even if I never do, I can live and admit that I don't know everthing. The only thing I do know is , I am smart enough to know just how stupid I really am. ( an old saying, not sure where it came from). I also know that it is fun running all of the possibles as to how it all happen through my mind. Does that soon weird to you. It kinda does to me.

[velkyn]

Velkyn:

that’s the old  fine-tuning or “goldilocks”  argument, that there has to be a god that wants the universe “perfect” for us.

The fine-tuning argument doesn't mention God. That's a christian add-on. Wiki defines FT thus:

The fine-tuned universe is the proposition that the conditions that allow life in the Universe can only occur when certain universal fundamental physical constants lie within a very narrow range, so that if any of several fundamental constants were only slightly different the universe would be unlikely to be conducive to the establishment and development of matter, astronomical structures, elemental diversity, or life as it is presently understood.[1] The existence and extent of fine-tuning in the universe is a matter of dispute in the scientific community.

No mention of God there. And the question persists, why do the physical constants of the universe have the values they do?

I think it’s a little naïve to say that the fine-tuning argument was somehow created without the idea of a god behind it.  You may be right but to me, that’s like saying ID is really only about aliens making humans and no one really ever meant it to be applied to a god. 

The idea of “fine-tuning” implies a “tuner” and that this “tuner” wanted humans to be a result of the universe.  There is nothing to say that there ever had to be one, things may simply just “be”, we don’t know.  If there are effects, they have to have some value or they simply don’t exist.  This value, another value, and if it were another value and humans couldn’t exist, then the question is rather moot since we wouldn’t be here to ask the question.

[velkyn]

Intelligence leaves behind a characteristic trademark or signature — what I call “specified complexity.” An event exhibits specified complexity if it is contingent and therefore not necessary; if it is complex and therefore not easily repeatable by chance; and if it is specified in the sense of exhibiting an independently given pattern. Note that complexity in the sense of improbability is not sufficient to eliminate chance: flip a coin long enough, and you'll witness a highly complex or improbable event. Even so, you'll have no reason not to attribute it to chance.

Okay, what if this “specified complexity” is quite complex but is very flawed?  What does this say about any designer?  If a perfect god designed a very very imperfect world, or human, that doesn’t make much sense.  For example, humans are rife with foul-ups, that makes sense with evolution and dont’ make much sense if this god was involved.

Specifications must be objectively given.The important thing about specifications is that they be objectively given and not just imposed on events after the fact. For instance, if an archer shoots arrows into a wall and we then paint bull’s-eyes around them, we impose a pattern after the fact. On the other hand, if the targets are set up in advance (“specified”) and then the archer hits them accurately, we know it was by design. In my book The Design Inference, I argue that specified complexity reliably detects design. In that book, however, I focus largely on examples from the human rather than the natural sciences. The main criticism of that work to date concerns whether the Darwinian mechanism of natural selection and random variation is not in fact fully capable of generating specified complexity. More recently, in No Free Lunch, I show that undirected natural processes like the Darwinian mechanism are incapable of generating the specified complexity that exists in biological organisms. It follows that chance and necessity are insufficient for the natural sciences and that the natural sciences need to leave room for design.( William A. Dembski)

Dembski, to be blunt, is an idiot.  He is a classic creationist that ignores all of the evidence that shows his claims of “irreducible complexity” to be utterly wrong.  A good overview of how wrong he is: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/information/dembski.html and http://www.talkorigins.org/design/faqs/nfl/ It’s pretty funny to see Dembski claiming how awful it would be to paint bull’s eye around a shot arrow, when that’s *exactly* what he does, making his presuppositions that there is some god.  He also uses a classic strawman, in trying to claim that evolutionary scientists claim that things happen by pure chance and that’s simply not true. 

and you are right that I don't know how the universe exist, I don't know why Angela puts up with me, and I don't know how to make home made bread.

Don’t know *yet*, love and get a cookbook. I’m curious, if we did find out how the universe started, say it was the brane theory, then what happens to this god?  All through history, this god has retreated in front of science, never ever showing its existence, and always being showed that the claims about it are wrong over and over again. the gaps that this god can still fit in are quite small and getting smaller.

Granted , if I tried I could more than likely find out the last two. But even if I never do, I can live and admit that I don't know everthing. The only thing I do know is , I am smart enough to know just how stupid I really am. ( an old saying, not sure where it came from). I also know that it is fun running all of the possibles as to how it all happen through my mind. Does that soon weird to you. It kinda does to me.

I don’t know is a good start but that doesn’t mean any god did anything.  And ignorance can generally be cured. 

[Gnu Ordure]

Velkyn:

I think it’s a little naïve to say that the fine-tuning argument was somehow created without the idea of a god behind it.

I agree that the fine-tuning argument is a religious proposition.

But the question of why certain constants have the values they do is a scientific question.

To be honest, I can't find out who first used the term fine-tuning. My understanding is that the concept/question was invented/posed by scientists, and then eagerly grabbed by theists, but I may be wrong.

[jetson]

I just watched a documentary that was trying to show where a specific location in our known universe is a "cold spot", and it appears, though more data is needed, that some galaxies are being dragged towards an "edge", they call it dark movement.  Fascinating.

Anyway, one theoretical physicist is trying to show where our universe cannot be alone based on the improbability.  And she is proposing that multiverses allow the probability of our own universe to be much more likely.  She believes that the cold spot is being created because another universe is tugging on a section of ours, dragging a chunk of our galaxies in a specific direction.  Very cool stuff.

[Gnu Ordure]

riley:

There are many reasons , some are just faith that I am doing what I FEEL is right inside. Of course those are not reason enough to really talk about at this time.

Feelings are important, riley, I wouldn't deny that. But sometimes they lead us astray, and they lead us into wishful thinking: we start to believe that something is true because we wish it were true - and then it feels right and good that this thing is true, so we carry on believing in it.

Why do you want to believe in Jesus? Why does it feel right and good for you?

Let me guess:

1. It gives your life meaning; it explains why you're here.

2. It tells you how to behave and what to do. Morality in a tidy package.

3. It removes your fear of death by promising you life everlasting.

4. If your life is painful, it promises joy and bliss in the hereafter.

5. It promises justice. Everyone will be judged, and then rewarded or punished accordingly. Life is ultimately fair.

That's a nice dream, riley. I wish it were all true, just as you do. I wish that life was a fairy-tale in which the prince slays the dragon and punishes the baddies and rescues the princess and they both live happily in love ever after. 

But it's not.

and you are right that I don't know how the universe exist,

My question was why, not how.   

I don't know why Angela puts up with me,

Some questions are beyond human understanding. 

[riley2112]

Why do you want to believe in Jesus? Why does it feel right and good for you?

I thought I could answer that question with ease. But my mind just went blank . Let me think about that for awhile. 

1. It gives your life meaning; it explains why you're here.

2. It tells you how to behave and what to do. Morality in a tidy package.

3. It removes your fear of death by promising you life everlasting.

4. If your life is painful, it promises joy and bliss in the hereafter.

5. It promises justice. Everyone will be judged, and then rewarded or punished accordingly. Life is ultimately fair.

That is why I believe in God. But why Jesus? Why that God? There are many more to pick from . Can't anything be easy on this forum?

[Gnu Ordure]

1. It gives your life meaning; it explains why you're here.

2. It tells you how to behave and what to do. Morality in a tidy package.

3. It removes your fear of death by promising you life everlasting.

4. If your life is painful, it promises joy and bliss in the hereafter.

5. It promises justice. Everyone will be judged, and then rewarded or punished accordingly. Life is ultimately fair.

That is why I believe in God.

Then stop, and think.

You don't need this fairy-tale of God, comforting though it is. And it's a lie, from start to finish, so its comforts are illusionary.

Here's the truth, as someone* said:

"We must live within the ambiguity of partial freedom, partial power, and partial knowledge."
 
That is our lot. That is the human condition.

Someone else said that one of the characteristics of adulthood is the ability to tolerate uncertainty.

Religion removes uncertainty, so believers don't grow up.

Think about it, riley.

Gnu.

* S. Kopp

[riley2112]

1. It gives your life meaning; it explains why you're here.

2. It tells you how to behave and what to do. Morality in a tidy package.

3. It removes your fear of death by promising you life everlasting.

4. If your life is painful, it promises joy and bliss in the hereafter.

5. It promises justice. Everyone will be judged, and then rewarded or punished accordingly. Life is ultimately fair.

That is why I believe in God.

Then stop, and think.

You don't need this fairy-tale of God, comforting though it is. And it's a lie, from start to finish, so its comforts are illusionary.

Here's the truth, as someone* said:

"We must live within the ambiguity of partial freedom, partial power, and partial knowledge."
 
That is our lot. That is the human condition.

Someone else said that one of the characteristics of adulthood is the ability to tolerate uncertainty.

Religion removes uncertainty, so believers don't grow up.

Think about it, riley.

Gnu.

* S. Kopp

I disagree. There is no uncertainty in not believing, you are born, you live your life the way you want, you die. that is certain.
However when you believe, You are born, you live you life the way you wait , you search for what you know is missing and you die. What happens then, That is where the uncertainty comes into play.

I am not saying what you believe is wrong for you. I am not saying the way you live your life is wrong for you. Hell, I am not even saying that the facts you have put in front of me are wrong. All I am saying is the facts don't go far enough for me. There is something inside of me that needs more, I feel it, I can't prove it , I have no evidence for it , but I know it is there. To be born , to live , and to die, just to  become worm food. I know there is something else as sure as I know that sooner or later there will be a cure for cancer.

We think having faith means being convinced God exists in the same way we are convinced a chair exists. People who cannot be completely convinced of God’s existence think faith is impossible for them. Not so. People who doubt can have great faith because faith is something you do, not something you think. In fact, the greater your doubt the more heroic your faith. (I read this somewhere, not sure where)

Here is a quote that I have always liked,

To believe in God or in a guiding force because someone tells you to is the height of stupidity. We are given senses to receive our information within. With our own eyes we see, and with our own skin we feel. With our intelligence, it is intended that we understand. But each person must puzzle it out for himself or herself.
(Sophy Burnham)

[velkyn]

We think having faith means being convinced God exists in the same way we are convinced a chair exists. People who cannot be completely convinced of God’s existence think faith is impossible for them. Not so. People who doubt can have great faith because faith is something you do, not something you think. In fact, the greater your doubt the more heroic your faith. (I read this somewhere, not sure where)

that’s a great excuse that makes no sense.  I’m guessing that you dont’ accept that the gods of other religions exist, Riley.  Are you more faithful about them since you are sure that they don’t?

From the bible, the people back then were quite convinced that God existed as much as a chair existed.  They were ignorant and superstitious.  It’s only now, in this modern era where we have the scientific method, recording devices, and exposure to so many religions where we see the similarities of their claims, that Christians must attempt to redefine “faith” and how “real” their god is.   From what I can see, you mean faith to be “blind faith”; b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof  (merriam webster)with no consideration of what is supported by evidence and what is not.  And no, I cannot have that kind of faith, Riley.  I have trust, which is supported by evidence, but not this willfully ignorant faith.  Faith is the belief in things that are not supported by evidence, and it is something you think and something you do. You have come to the conclusion that you would rather believe in this than not for whatever reason, that if fills a “hole” within you.   

[riley2112]

You deserve an answer to what you are asking me. I am not saying that the Gods of other religions are fake , They may even be the same god. As you pointed out people of that time were ignorant and superstitious. However any religion that states that the earth is on the back of a turtle or on post or something , Yea I think I would dismiss as not true , As for the rest of your post, I would like to give this some thought before I respond. You have once again put things in a way that I have not thought of. You seem to do that alot.

[Gnu Ordure]

Riley:

"We must live within the ambiguity of partial freedom, partial power, and partial knowledge."

I disagree. There is no uncertainty in not believing, you are born, you live your life the way you want, you die. that is certain.

That's illogical, Riley. If I claim to have partial knowledge, you can't refute that by pointing out that I have certain knowledge of some things - there's no contradiction there.

(Also, you're wrong to claim that atheists live their life the way they want. Ask some starving third-world child if he's living the way he wants. Partial freedom, remember?)

So, I still have partial knowledge; and so do you.

All I am saying is the facts don't go far enough for me. There is something inside of me that needs more,

I understand. I think everybody wants to know the answer to life, the universe and everything. And as I said before, this can lead to wishful thinking: we start to believe that something is true because we wish it were true - and then it feels right and good that this thing is true, so we carry on believing in it.

That's what you're doing, riley.

And wishful thinking is a form of logical fallacy, I wish that P is true, therefore P is true, or the inverse, I wish that P is false, therefore P is false.

To be born , to live , and to die, just to  become worm food. I know there is something else

You wish there is something else.

In fact, the greater your doubt the more heroic your faith.

Adults believing in religions on the flimsiest of evidence doesn't constitute heroism. And you personally having some doubts at this time doesn't make you a bigger hero. Sorry. This just sounds like another part of your own personal fairy-tale.

[Brakeman]

The old Testament was Polytheistic, that is, more than one god existed. Even the First commandment out of the Ten states that "Thou shall not have any gods before me."  That's like you wife saying that you should have no wives before her, in other words, she is to be your favorite wife. That certainly does not say that no other gods or wives do not exist.

Now  how, in your present "god view", do other gods exist?

[velkyn]

You deserve an answer to what you are asking me. I am not saying that the Gods of other religions are fake , They may even be the same god. As you pointed out people of that time were ignorant and superstitious. However any religion that states that the earth is on the back of a turtle or on post or something , Yea I think I would dismiss as not true , As for the rest of your post, I would like to give this some thought before I respond. You have once again put things in a way that I have not thought of. You seem to do that alot.

  Sorry Riley, a lot of us have been at this for a while. 

The problem with trying to claim that all gods are one god is that most if not all religions say things that would contradict this. For example, they can claim that there is only one, and their way of worshipping is the only way or another common one is that that all other gods are evil/demons.  In the OT, the Hebrew god seems to acknowledge that there are other gods (thou shalt not have any gods before me) and even Pharoah’s magicians could do just as good of magic as Moses and Aaron could do (if I recall correctly, any magicians would have been priests in Egypt, probably to Thoth).   Then we get into the later books that have other gods being just figments of the imagination without  (like when Elijah had the altar contest).  Finally, in the NT, we have the declaration that this god is the only one and that one should be able to know this god by just looking around at the universe.  We have JC doing miracles but nothing like the ones of the OT.  Then miracles trickle off, with only an occasional killing (Sapphira and Ananias) or healing.  And now we have even fewer.

As for saying that a religion that says that the earth is on the back of a turtle, yep, that’s pretty ridiculous and easy to determine it’s wrong.  However, the bible claims that a god created the earth from a void, that this god created light before a light source; that he made humans from clay and tried to have one of them choose an animal as a mate.  There was supposedly a magic tree that if one ate the fruit one finally knew what good and evil was.  There’s even two different versions of this story in the same “book” and they contradict each other, with the second saying that women were made from part of man’s chest.

Now you might want to say “but that’s all metaphor, and God didn’t really meant that literally”. Well, can’t it be that for the other religions? 

[riley2112]

That's illogical, Riley. If I claim to have partial knowledge, you can't refute that by pointing out that I have certain knowledge of some things - there's no contradiction there.

I think I understand your point-certain knowledge would in itself be partial knowledge.

(Also, you're wrong to claim that atheists live their life the way they want. Ask some starving third-world child if he's living the way he wants. Partial freedom, remember?)

So you believe that atheists does not live their life's the way they wait.  They made the decision not to believe in a God in the same way believers made a decision to believe. How they find the world they live in may not be what they what, however that really is not what we are talking about, is it?

[I understand. I think everybody wants to know the answer to life, the universe and everything. And as I said before, this can lead to wishful thinking: we start to believe that something is true because we wish it were true - and then it feels right and good that this thing is true, so we carry on believing in it.

That's what you're doing, riley.

It does feel right , but I do have my reasons for believing ,  If a person opposes even the possibility of there being a God, then any evidence can be rationalized or explained away. It is like if someone refuses to believe that people have walked on the moon, then no amount of information is going to change their thinking. Photographs of astronauts walking on the moon, interviews with the astronauts, moon rocks...all the evidence would be worthless, because the person has already concluded that people cannot go to the moon. People that do not believe in God is just that , people that don't believe. I have seen on here that some of you have been Christians and lost your faith. Only you know why you lost your faith, maybe it was that God didn't answer your prays, maybe you lost someone close to you. Maybe , as you said to me it felt good not to have to worry about sin. So we start believing that God could not exist because he has done nothing for me lately. Or if God was good how could he allow this or that to happen. God is just not being the God I want so I just won't believe anymore. I find this some what sad but also some what funny , we(Christians) are accused of making a God that fits the life we want to  live and other people don't believe because God is not how they believe He should be.
   

Adults believing in religions on the flimsiest of evidence doesn't constitute heroism. And you personally having some doubts at this time doesn't make you a bigger hero. Sorry. This just sounds like another part of your own personal fairytale

.
People flying to the moon. or being able to talk from one side of the world to the other were at one time fairy tales. I can not make you, or anyone believe by argument, just as no one can make me not believe by argument. I will say this. you all sure spend a lot of time talking about something you don't believe in. are you sure you don't believe just a little ? just asking.  (come on , that is alittle funny)

[JeffPT]

/venting mode... engaged.

riley,

Damn it man.  What... did you go to church this morning and get a heaping helping of God juice or something?  With this post, it seems like you went all the way back to square fucking one.  Have you listened to a single thing we've said to you?  This post of yours is full of complete bullshit on just about every level.  We don't discount the possibility of god.  We don't 'refuse to believe in god'.  You just don't fucking get it.

You should have started out by saying that no argument would convince you, then most of us probably wouldn't have bothered with you.  Since you did not, and chose to reveal that fact after 174 fucking posts, you've been a colossal waste of time and effort.  Thanks a bunch. You know our arguments are better.  You know our logic is sound.  But you just aren't interested in the truth.  You are only interested in maintaining your stupid fucking faith because it makes you feel better.  We pummel you with logic, reason and evidence and you just brush it off because you want to.  I pity the weakness of your mind.  You will leave here exactly as you came in...  Ignorant... and happy to remain so. 

And you Christians wonder why we get so pissed off.  It is largely because of things like this.  Because you prefer what feels good over what is true.  I have no patience for that shit.  How do you live with yourself knowing that your entire belief system is based on that?  I would be so embarrassed. 

I had hopes for you, but I was wrong.  Personally, I'm done with you.  Just stay away from my kids with your shit.  Your religion is like a contagious cancer on the world and I don't want my kids to get it.  Good luck with your delusion. 

/vent mode... disengaged. 

[Alzael]

So you believe that atheists does not live their life's the way they wait.  They made the decision not to believe in a God in the same way believers made a decision to believe. How they find the world they live in may not be what they what, however that really is not what we are talking about, is it?

No one lives there lives the way that they want. We have laws in our society that prevent us from doing certain things. Societal, familial, and proffessional obligations. Basic needs we have to take time to satisfy, other people we have to deal with who sometimes act against us. No one lives the way they want to.

Also no, no one made a decision not to believe in a god. You cannot choose your beliefs. Could you suddenly choose to believe that the moon is purple? You could certainly pretend that you do, but that is not the same thing. What you can choose is the information that you expose yourself to and how honestly you look at the information. Whether you believe or not comes on it's own.

If a person opposes even the possibility of there being a God, then any evidence can be rationalized or explained away.

However no one does oppose the possibility of there being a god. We acknowledge the fact that there is no rational reason to consider why there should be one. It is certainly possible that there is a god. However it's also possible that at the center of every blackhole is a little man desperately searching for the light switch.

People that do not believe in God is just that , people that don't believe.

People who have long lists of evidence for why their beliefs are valid. Compared to the other side which has yet to produce a single piece of evidence, or even an intelligent argument in favour of it.

Only you know why you lost your faith, maybe it was that God didn't answer your prays, maybe you lost someone close to you. Maybe , as you said to me it felt good not to have to worry about sin. So we start believing that God could not exist because he has done nothing for me lately. Or if God was good how could he allow this or that to happen. God is just not being the God I want so I just won't believe anymore.

Or, as all of the evidence points to, it could be because he doesn't exist.

I find this some what sad but also some what funny , we(Christians) are accused of making a God that fits the life we want to  live and other people don't believe because God is not how they believe He should be.

Not how we believe he should be. God is not how the people who claim he exists should be. Which invalidates all of the claims that are made. Meaning that there is no logical reason to believe. Also one that does not behave in any way that is verifiable or makes sense with how we can see the world obviously works.

People flying to the moon. or being able to talk from one side of the world to the other were at one time fairy tales. I can not make you, or anyone believe by argument, just as no one can make me not believe by argument.

Not true. You could make us believe by argument. The trouble is that you don't have an argument. That's why you just wrote that post trying to write off everything that has been said all of this time as an ad hominem. in effect all that you have said is "of course you would say that, you're an atheist." Heedless of any rational argument made. This is why people like us fail to believe. Because the other side can offer nothing more than fallacies and assumptions that their own mental limitations apply to everyone.

Very disappointing Riley. I didn't expect you to become an atheist, but I thought that you would be better than this, at least.

[riley2112]

JeffPT; wow. you sound like my pastor. believe like I do or you are a waste of time. And I had hopes for you too Jeff, The problem is YOU just don't get it. I believe how I believe because of the things I read, the things I feel , the things I learn. Just like you. Just because we come up with different conclusions, You are right and I am wrong. Says who? and yea I do wonder why you get so pissed. If I don't agree with you,you get pissed. wow. sounds to me like a guy that's got your shit together and I should pay attention to everything you say. I really don't think we all need to believe the same way to get along or learn from one another. If we felt the same about everything  then there would not be anything to learn. Dude , you let me down.
I heard your logic and your reason and look at all of your evidence, I did not brush any of it off. I just have not come to the same conclusion you did. And don't pity me, I have learned alot on this cite.  You may not be wrong in your belief but to brush off my belief with no thought at all does not really show much of an open mind and isn't that one of the things that you bring up about me. One last thing, you have no ideal what my entire belief system is based on. Just as I have no ideal what you base your belief on. However , for you to talk to me with your " I know everything and you know nothing appeal" show no intelligence no morals and no honor. Like I said, Jeff, you sir, have let me down.
 I am truly sorry that you have the opinion of me that you do, because I have
 a growing respect for most of the people that I have talked to on this cite. I find it a little uneasy to think that just because I believe in God that you would find me not worst your time. That some how just feels wrong. Just saying

[riley2112]

Alzael; I am sorry if it come off and me saying; "of course you would say that, you're an atheist." That is not what I intend to say and not what I think, I truly don't understand why you don't believe in a God that I do Believe in. I can tell you why I believe, but I have no evidence for it and that is what you say you need. I wish I had some great thing I could point to and say , "see look, now you can believe" , but I don't.
  and you are right you can not make yourself believe in something just because you want to . As you have said."Whether you believe or not comes on it's own." Again I did not mean to offend anyone.

[Alzael]

Alzael; I am sorry if it come off and me saying; "of course you would say that, you're an atheist." That is not what I intend to say and not what I think

Actually it is. You said exactly that several times. For example:

"If a person opposes even the possibility of there being a God, then any evidence can be rationalized or explained away."

You have just stated that all of the arguments made against gods existence are made not because there is a legitimate argument or point, but because the person making them is an atheist. The majority of your entire post said this. It was simply a blanket dismissal of every rational argument against gods existence because you claim the person making them does not want to believe, and will say anything to prove it to themselves.

So yes, it is very clearly what you intended to say. Because it is exactly what you said several times. You're, quite frankly, lying.

Just as you lie whenever you say that you have any interest in the truth, as can be seen here:

"just as no one can make me not believe by argument." This statement alone renders any claims you make about wanting to learn the truth (or even caring about the truth) an utter lie, because you just admitted that there is no argument you would accept as convincing because you want to believe. The offence comes from the fact that you have assumed that everyone else shares your dishonesty and is equally uncaring about the truth. Willing to rationalize away or explain away any evidence that doesn't fit in what they want to believe.

I truly don't understand why you don't believe in a God that I do Believe in.

Then clearly you haven't actually bothered to pay attention to anything anyone has said. Because peoplehave explained it in great detail over and over again. At the very least you should have picked up the number one reason. There is absolutely no evidence that one exists. However.....

I can tell you why I believe, but I have no evidence for it and that is what you say you need.

So it seems that you do understand why at least in part. You just listed that exact reason #1 right here. You have no evidence. This also casts a light on your statements in the previous post, where you make your ad hominem claim that people who don't want to believe in god will ignore any evidence that says otherwise. You have just admitted that there is no evidence that says otherwise. So again, your previous post was just an ad hominem dismissal, as well as being entirely dishonest.

As I said, I didn't expect you to become an atheist, but I thought that at least you would have grasped some degree of intellectual honesty by now.

Again I did not mean to offend anyone.

Considering that we've established a rather noticeable pattern of dishonesty, I find this less than convincing.

I've already mentioned the obvious dishonesty, but the really offensive thing is the wasting of everyone's time and effort. You spent weeks asking questions and everyone went out of their way to answer them, only to get all of that effort greeted with a post that shows no consideration for anything that anyone has said up to this point. A post that instead dismisses everything anyone has said as atheists saying what they want to believe to make them happy. Saying the exact opposite of what has been explained to you painstakingly over all of this time so that you would at the very least understand. All you were asked to do is be honest and question honestly and you not only failed to do that, you admit to having no intention of doing it from the start. It's a spit in the metaphorical face to every person who took the time to help you answer the questions you asked.

Let's be honest here. You've lied on numerous occasions. You've misreprented yourself. Clearly ignored what people have been telling you all this time. And dismissed all of the logic and evidence presented (at your own request) with a fallacious post that tries to paint atheists as being just as irrational and dishonest as Christian. And you actually wonder why Jeff was pissed? You actually are wondering why people are offended? Do you really think that's in the least bit convincing?

You may not be wrong in your belief but to brush off my belief with no thought at all does not really show much of an open mind

Firstly, show where anyone has brushed off your beliefs with no thought at all? We've thought about it a lot. We have thousands of threads spent thinking about it and analyzing it, Remember? How has anyone done this. Please list some examples if you're going to make the claim.

As for an open mind, an open mind does not mean that you consider every stupid notion that someone comes up with. That would be....well stupid. An open mind means that you evaluate the evidence and the arguments fairly. The problem is that ,as we all well know, you have no evidence and your arguments rely on fallacy. So how can one consider something with an open mind when you can produce nothing for one to consider.

owever , for you to talk to me with your " I know everything and you know nothing appeal" show no intelligence no morals and no honor. Like I said, Jeff, you sir, have let me down.

You're misrepresenting what he said. Which is not surprising, all things considered.

I find it a little uneasy to think that just because I believe in God that you would find me not worst your time. That some how just feels wrong. Just saying

Again, a lie and a misrepresentation. He did not say that you were not worth the time because you believe in god. He said you wasted our time for the same reasons that I did. They had nothing to do with your being a Christian. They had to do with you.

I am truly sorry that you have the opinion of me that you do, because I have
 a growing respect for most of the people that I have talked to on this cite.

I think it's fairly safe to say that you've lost any respect that you had. All you were asked to do was be honest, and you couldn't even manage that.

[riley2112]

after rereading what I wrote,I can see where I did indeed say that ""of course you would say that, you're an atheist. I see that I indeed did lie. If would seem that I have lied many times on this cite. or did I just change my mind a few times.However the more I read this statement, I have to say that I agree with it. You feel that I have wasted your time. I truly am sorry that I may have. You have told me many facts, you have told me that one of the reasons you spend so time arguing against God is that we get into your laws. Those are my laws too. Do you know that there are a 7 billion people on this planet and the mass amount believe in  God in one form or another.
I am talking about over 6 billion of them, I will not waste anymore of your time. I do have respect for your knowledge of the mind. But I believe that once you start believing with just your mind and stop believing a little with you heart then you lose some of the wonder of living. You are right about one thing, we are just on this planet for a short time. So I will stop wasting yours. It has been a pleasure. one more thing , I have shown you nothing but respect. can you say that about the way you treat believings that visit your cite. Merry Christmas, oh sorry ,, Happy Holidays.

[Ivellios]

Do you know that there are a 7 billion people on this planet and the mass amount believe in  God in one form or another.
I am talking about over 6 billion of them, I will not waste anymore of your time. I do have respect for your knowledge of the mind. But I believe that once you start believing with just your mind and stop believing a little with you heart then you lose some of the wonder of living.

Even if it was/is true that 6 Billion people believe in one god or another, each one believes in something mutually exclusive with all the others. 1 Billion Christians that without adding both Catholicism and Protestanst will not reach this mark, 1 Billion Muslims which doesn't need to be added to with anything else, has both tried to kill everyone not of thier Religion. Even with these 2 mutually exclusive religions how would an outsider know which one were "true" if either were? Should we believe the man that hopped onto a Pegasus and flew to the 7 Heavens, or the 2^nd jew to be born of a virgin like the 100+ Greeks born of Zeus, died and rose from the dead like 10+ gods[1] that says among other things astrology IS real, and to be named after said Greek god. Iesous becomes Jesus in modern English.

Christianity is the Borg of Religion, what they cannot extinguish, they adopt, assimilate and claim it as thier own. They did it with Easter[2], Saturnalia and now they're focusing on Halloween. Yes, that's right. They're planning to "Christianize" Halloween and claim it was Christian all along. My Chruch called it 'Harvest Fest' and made it yet another reason to go to church and listen to a mini-sermon.

Christmas was even mentioned in Jeremiah. Whom referred to the evergreen chopped down, brought into the house, braced so it didn't totter, and decorated with silver and gold as an idol of Ba'al. It was part of his, "If you're going to worship thier gods, you're going to be ruled by them then!" speech. Funny how a church that supposedly covered the bible every 3 years always seemed to skip that part. But then again, covering the 1/2 chapter of Jeremiah being in the well was sufficient to cover all of Jeremiah & Lamentations. 

So Happy Saturnalia and Holidays to you too. I just don't know what the Chaldean's/Sumerians called it.

1.	Horus to name one.
2.	still named after the goddess of fertility, now you know what all the symbolism is for.

[wright]

one more thing , I have shown you nothing but respect. can you say that about the way you treat believings that visit your cite. Merry Christmas, oh sorry ,, Happy Holidays.

Respect must be earned, riley. From your earlier posts on this and other threads, it seemed to me that you were honestly struggling with your faith. That is something few theist posters here are willing to admit to, and something I went through myself, so you gained some respect from me.

Believers who come here to preach, who refuse to back up their claims, who ignore repeated questions and rebuttals, who keep using well-refuted arguments even when this is pointed out, who lie, are not respected.

You come across as someone who, like a lot of theist posters here, has not thought out the implications and contradictions of his religious faith. At the most, you're at the very beginning of that process. I urge you to keep pondering those aspects of your beliefs that make you uncomfortable, because critical thinking has many, many more applications than that, if you truly cultivate the skill.

I do have respect for your knowledge of the mind. But I believe that once you start believing with just your mind and stop believing a little with you heart then you lose some of the wonder of living.

And riley, just because we put an emphasis on skepticism and critical thinking here does not mean we have lost our sense of wonder. My appreciation of beauty, of the myriad pleasures of life, of the people I love, is no way diminished by being able to explain that appreciation in material terms.

Surfing, music, the smell of limes, my sister's voice: all these things can make me delirious with joy. Trust me, when that happens I rarely stop to remind myself that *only* the release of endorphins in my brain is making me feel that way.

Happy Holidays, riley. Keep that thinking cap on!