Author Topic: A Challenge to Christians  (Read 24665 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline holybuckets

  • Emergency Room
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
  • Darwins +3/-34
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #464 on: May 27, 2013, 04:07:52 AM »
Thanks for the posts. Needless to say, we are still deadlocked at no evidence when analyzing God scientifically. 

Jaime,  I agree, I am just saying that at this time, scientific proof is unavailable to both sides. DNA supports a creator in the fact that everyone and everything is unique.  But I am sure you don't see it that way. The problem is you would reject any evidence.

 Wheels, the prayer thing doesn't hold water. Look at the ridiculous claim that the title of this web site makes, i hate to be the bearer of bad news to someone whose arm just got cut off, but it's not growing back. 

Jaime, you said "Anything in the universe (including something that is only temporarily in it) will necessarily leave evidence of its existence behind.  That includes your god, since he would have to enter the universe somehow in order to do anything within it."

God did leave at least one thing behind that proves His existence. This is Jesus Christ. Since both sides have agreed to the fact that we have no scientific means or measures available to test, then proof has to come from other areas. Two areas that I am proposing are historically and scholarly.

Aside from Jaime, are we in agreement to continue?

Offline wheels5894

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2793
  • Darwins +121/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #465 on: May 27, 2013, 04:35:19 AM »
No, Holybuckets, I am not. I have proposed a way we might detect the action of deity and I have also mentioned that the abscence of activity of a deity means the end of the Christian god.

Moreover, the prayer experiment, conducted under funding from the Templeton Foundation is actually very significant. It cover a lot of people and the fact was that those who knew they were prayed for actually did worse that the others, prayed for or not prayed for. This, at least, is a demonstration that prayer for the sick in ineffective. Given the promises made by Jesus about granting requests, and praying for someone with heart problems is certainly a good cause, the experiment seems to show that the promise was in vain and that, actually, it is broken though many people have probably already found that out.  This sort of experiment cannot just be ignored.

So I think there are ways to ascertain if there is activity of a god, that the prayer experiment shows that there was none in the case of prayer and that, so far, evidence for a god is lacking. Looking back into the history of the religion, reading the bible and such merely tells us what some people who never met Jesus thought. It tells us nothing about the present day and whether there is a god in the here and now that cares and acts on our behalf. Remember, the Christian god promised to act in the world in response to prayer and if it could be shown that it does not, then the god of the Christians is not what they believe - the god ends up being like the deist god and is pointless to worship or follow.

No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Offline wheels5894

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2793
  • Darwins +121/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #466 on: May 27, 2013, 09:50:43 AM »
Holybuckets

If you want to talk about historical matter related to Jesus, you might want to read this beforehand as I shall use it as a source - at least for books and authors.
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5239
  • Darwins +598/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #467 on: May 27, 2013, 10:46:59 AM »
Jaime,  I agree, I am just saying that at this time, scientific proof is unavailable to both sides. DNA supports a creator in the fact that everyone and everything is unique.  But I am sure you don't see it that way. The problem is you would reject any evidence.
I know some people believe that, but it doesn't make it true.  You have to be able to show - not just claim - why this is the case, and why your explanation works better than the existing, accepted sciences (biology/evolution).  A strong point against DNA supporting creation is the fact that there are only four base pairs (letters), as opposed to dozens.  Look at the language we're typing in, for example.  We have no less than 26 individual 'letters' that we use for representing language; DNA has four.  Our 'code' for this language, English, has far more potential variety than DNA code does simply because it has far more 'letters' to work with.

Because DNA has so few total base pairs, you end up with a lot of base pair sequences which end up coding for the same amino acid.  Indeed, because of the few base pairs, DNA ultimately ends up being extremely repetitive - the sort of repetitiveness you would be much more likely to find in something that developed naturally through pressures from the environment than in something designed by intelligence.  I've done computer programming in the past, and I know how much easier it is to work with a regular programming language than with something like binary (which has two 'letters').  It's true that computers do in fact still use binary in their transistors, but we use higher-level languages for the operating systems of computers nowadays - and those higher-level languages are evident within the hard drives of those computers.  The thing is, DNA has no such higher-level language (at least not that we've ever found - in deed, we've never even found the slightest hint that there ever was one).

The point is, the total lack of scientific evidence argues against a 'creator', and not just in DNA.  I suspect that the main reason you think DNA requires a 'creator' is because you think any code would have to have one.  But simple codes like DNA don't have to have been 'created'.  They could simply have developed naturally over time, becoming steadily more complex as they developed due to the pressures of natural selection (things like environmental stimuli, competition, and reproduction).  It's a lot more believable than something like a god making every living thing...working through a code with only four letters in it.

Quote from: holybuckets
God did leave at least one thing behind that proves His existence. This is Jesus Christ. Since both sides have agreed to the fact that we have no scientific means or measures available to test, then proof has to come from other areas. Two areas that I am proposing are historically and scholarly.
I definitely do not agree with your statement that "we have no scientific measures available to test".  If Jesus actually existed, he had DNA, which we could test and trace.  There's carbon-dating, and other scientific means that could be used to check on claims made in the Bible.  Indeed, we have used such methods on ancient scrolls to confirm their authenticity.

There's some serious problems with claiming historical evidence in favor of the existence of Jesus Christ (let alone his supposed divinity).  For one, according to the Gospels, most of the disciples knew where Jesus's tomb was, as did Joseph of Aramathea, as did the Romans (because they had guards there).  Yet with all of these people who knew the tomb's physical location, some of whom would have taken the opportunity to write it down or at least pass it on to others...we don't have a single record of its actual location.  Not one.

Are we seriously supposed to believe that all of the people who knew the location of the "empty tomb" simply forgot to tell anyone else or write it down for posterity's sake?  Because that's the only way that the tomb's location would have been lost, that or a deliberate and intentional effort to hide or destroy that information.  That, or there never was such a tomb to begin with.  And that's just one of the issues with your historical evidence.

Do you see the problem with claiming historical evidence now, when that historical evidence has holes large enough to drive a truck through?  Never mind the things which the Gospels claim happened that there are no records of ever actually happening, anywhere else - when there certainly should be records of it.

As for scholarly evidence, this is even more threadbare.  Yes, some scholars reference Christians, Christianity, and so on, but very few actually reference Jesus Christ.  The ones that do are either much later - meaning, nobody actually took down any scholarly records during or immediately after the period of his life - or have been altered, such as Josephus's Antiquities (notably, nobody so much as mentions the two passages where he 'talks' about Jesus until hundreds of years after the fact; indeed, during the time of a man known to espouse pious frauds, lying in the name of his religion).  Do you see the problem with trying to claim scholarly evidence now?

Offline holybuckets

  • Emergency Room
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
  • Darwins +3/-34
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #468 on: May 27, 2013, 10:54:10 AM »
Holybuckets

If you want to talk about historical matter related to Jesus, you might want to read this beforehand as I shall use it as a source - at least for books and authors.
Thanks for the heads up. I feel we need some ground rules and that is why I am asking you what sources are acceptable. For example, you gave me a website authored by someone named Jim Walker.  I will still ask permission to use mine, mainly because you will only discount it anyway.
I would like to use as my sources, The Bible, scholarly authors and historians with advanced degrees in the field who have dedicated their lives to the subject, and primary witness evidence.
I am sure you agree that the testimony and evidence given should be weighed on credibility and reliability.

Offline holybuckets

  • Emergency Room
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
  • Darwins +3/-34
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #469 on: May 27, 2013, 10:57:11 AM »
Thanks Jaime,
I was going to use DNA as well for the proof of God. DNA is unique in every aspect, as God's creation is.
But that being said, DNA still is far from scientific proof that God does not exist.

Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5239
  • Darwins +598/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #470 on: May 27, 2013, 11:05:45 AM »
I know you were talking to wheels, but here's my two cents.

I would like to use as my sources, The Bible,
Provided you can authenticate the events in the Bible which you are talking about with outside, unrelated sources, there should be no problems with it.  Think of it this way, holybuckets - when someone writes a report or paper, they can use Wikipedia as a source, but they have to use other sources too, because Wikipedia is not always reliable.

Quote from: holybuckets
scholarly authors and historians with advanced degrees in the field who have dedicated their lives to the subject,
There never has been any problem with this.  However, understand that when you use such sources, their credentials are checked, and even an expert can be affected by bias.

Note, this is one of the reasons scientists invite their critics to investigate their findings and provide all of their information to those critics, because it is so easy for a person to get caught up in their own bias.

Quote from: holybuckets
and primary witness evidence.
Sure, provided you can show that these primary witnesses ever actually lived, and that they were actually witnesses to the events you discuss.

Quote from: holybuckets
I am sure you agree that the testimony and evidence given should be weighed on credibility and reliability.
That seems reasonable.  Just bear in mind that someone who devoutly believes in something has to work harder to show that they are credible and reliable - because of that bias problem I mentioned.

Offline wheels5894

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2793
  • Darwins +121/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #471 on: May 27, 2013, 11:09:58 AM »
Holybuckets

If you want to talk about historical matter related to Jesus, you might want to read this beforehand as I shall use it as a source - at least for books and authors.
Thanks for the heads up. I feel we need some ground rules and that is why I am asking you what sources are acceptable. For example, you gave me a website authored by someone named Jim Walker.  I will still ask permission to use mine, mainly because you will only discount it anyway.
I would like to use as my sources, The Bible, scholarly authors and historians with advanced degrees in the field who have dedicated their lives to the subject, and primary witness evidence.
I am sure you agree that the testimony and evidence given should be weighed on credibility and reliability.

Well the website I mentioned is only an odd one I came across today. I know nothing about the author but it covers the ground quite well and has some good references at the end.

The bible is the subject of our enquiry, not the evidence of something else. The principle, if not the only, evidence there is comes from the bible so we need to understand if this is a book that stands up as historically reliable or not. It is all very well to accept it in faith but when we come to an historical enquiry, the bible is the first thing we have to deal with.
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5239
  • Darwins +598/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #472 on: May 27, 2013, 11:14:40 AM »
I was going to use DNA as well for the proof of God. DNA is unique in every aspect, as God's creation is.
DNA is not "unique in every aspect".  Didn't you pay attention to what I just wrote?  The base pairs of DNA are anything but unique.  Indeed, with only four base pairs, there are trillions upon trillions upon trillions upon trillions of exact copies of each base pair.

Furthermore, the fact that most organisms share a lot of DNA (and share more DNA based on how closely-related they are) also argues against the "DNA is unique" argument.  For crying out loud, we share nearly half of our DNA (that is to say, exactly - you could splice the shared DNA from a bacterial cell into a human cell and it would presumably work just as well) with single-celled organisms.  How is that 'unique'?  For that matter, 99% of human DNA is exactly shared with every other human who has ever lived.  The only differences between me and you, DNA-wise, is a tiny, tiny fraction of a percent of our total DNA?  How is that 'unique'?

Quote from: holybuckets
But that being said, DNA still is far from scientific proof that God does not exist.
You can't have this both ways, holybuckets.  You can't say, on the one hand, "DNA is proof of the existence of God", and on the other, "DNA doesn't prove that God doesn't exist".  That's contradictory, to say the least.

If you advance the claim that DNA helps prove the existence of your god, and someone can satisfactorily show that it does not, then DNA in fact helps disprove the existence of your god.  Because you made a claim that could be shown to be wrong, yet are trying to claim that it can't show you to be wrong.  Trying to pretend otherwise is called "moving the goalposts" and it damages your own credibility every single time you do it.  Do you understand?

Offline holybuckets

  • Emergency Room
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
  • Darwins +3/-34
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #473 on: May 27, 2013, 11:18:38 AM »
Guys,
You opinions are very good, however, they are worthless in a debate. You can claim the Bible is wrong all you want, but all I have to do to defeat your opinion is bring in a qualified witness to dispute you.
This is how debate works. Opinions are acceptable in certain arenas, but carry the least weight of any kind of evidence. Historical, scholarly, and primary evidence trumps all. I will tell you in advance, here is where your little unsubstantiated myth theory will fall flat in its face. Mainly because it is your opinion and backed by very few scholars.

Offline holybuckets

  • Emergency Room
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
  • Darwins +3/-34
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #474 on: May 27, 2013, 11:19:49 AM »
Jaime,
Enough with the DNA- it does not prove that God does not exist. Deal with it.

Offline wheels5894

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2793
  • Darwins +121/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #475 on: May 27, 2013, 11:21:08 AM »
Guys,
You opinions are very good, however, they are worthless in a debate. You can claim the Bible is wrong all you want, but all I have to do to defeat your opinion is bring in a qualified witness to dispute you.
This is how debate works. Opinions are acceptable in certain arenas, but carry the least weight of any kind of evidence. Historical, scholarly, and primary evidence trumps all. I will tell you in advance, here is where your little unsubstantiated myth theory will fall flat in its face. Mainly because it is your opinion and backed by very few scholars.

Wrong, I have made no claim about the bible apart from the fact that it has to be shown the be historically accurate before it can be used to prove anything else. Where's the problem with that?
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Offline holybuckets

  • Emergency Room
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
  • Darwins +3/-34
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #476 on: May 27, 2013, 11:25:52 AM »
Guys,
You opinions are very good, however, they are worthless in a debate. You can claim the Bible is wrong all you want, but all I have to do to defeat your opinion is bring in a qualified witness to dispute you.
This is how debate works. Opinions are acceptable in certain arenas, but carry the least weight of any kind of evidence. Historical, scholarly, and primary evidence trumps all. I will tell you in advance, here is where your little unsubstantiated myth theory will fall flat in its face. Mainly because it is your opinion and backed by very few scholars.

Wrong, I have made no claim about the bible apart from the fact that it has to be shown the be historically accurate before it can be used to prove anything else. Where's the problem with that?
Good thanks, then I will take that as a yes on the Bible. More specifically, I will be using 1 Corinthians, you may wish to look it up. It has been verified authentic by scholars across the board.

Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5239
  • Darwins +598/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #477 on: May 27, 2013, 11:53:02 AM »
Enough with the DNA- it does not prove that God does not exist. Deal with it.
First off, you still haven't acknowledged that it does not prove that your god exists.  Until you do, I have every reason to keep after you about it.

Second, as I said, if you make a claim that something helps prove your god's existence, and I (or someone else) can show that it does not, then it in fact helps to disprove your god's existence.  You can't have it both ways - you can't claim that something helps your claim if it's true, but doesn't hurt your claim if it's false.  Attempting to dodge, or move the goalposts, is fundamentally dishonest of you, and it damages your credibility every time you try to.

You opinions are very good, however, they are worthless in a debate. You can claim the Bible is wrong all you want, but all I have to do to defeat your opinion is bring in a qualified witness to dispute you.
Incorrect.  First off, you have to actually have a qualified witness.  In the case of the Bible, you do not - the Gospels do not qualify because you cannot verify who wrote them or whether the writers ever had anything to do with the 'witnesses'.  Second, you have to show that your qualified witness is telling the truth and competent to testify.  This is questionable in the case of the Gospels, because we can definitely prove that the Bible has been changed and modified tremendously since it was first put to paper - and who knows how much it was changed before that?

Quote from: holybuckets
This is how debate works. Opinions are acceptable in certain arenas, but carry the least weight of any kind of evidence.
Honestly, holybuckets, I am seriously starting to wonder whether you really even understand how a debate works.

Quote from: holybuckets
Historical, scholarly, and primary evidence trumps all.
First, you have to introduce that evidence, then you have to show that it's valid, then you have to explain any discrepancies, and even then, you can never really be sure that you have it completely right.  That someone else won't find some evidence that undercuts your conclusions.

Quote from: holybuckets
I will tell you in advance, here is where your little unsubstantiated myth theory will fall flat in its face. Mainly because it is your opinion and backed by very few scholars.
How many of those scholars were Christians, and thus biased in favor of the explanation that supports their belief system?  How many of them even tried to present it in a totally impartial manner?  How many of them presented their findings to people who had every reason to poke holes in their explanations, the way scientists do with scientific theories?

My guess is very few, if any - and that those few were much less certain that they had it right than you, who has done no real research, who is clearly biased in favor of your belief system, and who discounts anything that could possibly disprove your beliefs by saying, "that doesn't prove that God doesn't exist".  You dodge questions, you move the goalposts, you present things in a disingenuous and deceptive manner, and you run away from topics where you're losing your argument; you clearly approach this from the idea of proving that you're right, and never once assume that you could even possibly be wrong.

Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5239
  • Darwins +598/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #478 on: May 27, 2013, 11:55:45 AM »
Good thanks, then I will take that as a yes on the Bible. More specifically, I will be using 1 Corinthians, you may wish to look it up. It has been verified authentic by scholars across the board.
The fact that it's authentic in no way proves that it's true, let alone a historical account in the sense that you mean.

Offline holybuckets

  • Emergency Room
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
  • Darwins +3/-34
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #479 on: May 27, 2013, 12:02:02 PM »
Enough with the DNA- it does not prove that God does not exist. Deal with it.
First off, you still haven't acknowledged that it does not prove that your god exists.  Until you do, I have every reason to keep after you about it.
I can give you 100 of these:

"At that moment, when the DNA/RNA system became understood, the debate between Evolutionists and Creationists should have come to a screeching halt",  I.L. Cohen, Researcher and Mathematician; Member NY Academy of Sciences; Officer of the Archaeological Inst. of America; "Darwin Was Wrong - A Study in Probabilities"; New Research Publications, 1984, p. 4

So this must prove God exists, right?

Offline holybuckets

  • Emergency Room
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
  • Darwins +3/-34
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #480 on: May 27, 2013, 12:02:51 PM »
Good thanks, then I will take that as a yes on the Bible. More specifically, I will be using 1 Corinthians, you may wish to look it up. It has been verified authentic by scholars across the board.
The fact that it's authentic in no way proves that it's true, let alone a historical account in the sense that you mean.
Thanks for you opinion. I will use historical, scholarly, and primary evidence for my debate.

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7312
  • Darwins +170/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #481 on: May 27, 2013, 12:09:35 PM »
Good thanks, then I will take that as a yes on the Bible. More specifically, I will be using 1 Corinthians, you may wish to look it up. It has been verified authentic by scholars across the board.
The fact that it's authentic in no way proves that it's true, let alone a historical account in the sense that you mean.
Thanks for you opinion. I will use historical, scholarly, and primary evidence for my debate.

I really wish you would.  did you know that the Bible itself is none of those things?  It is nothing more than words on paper, just like any other book.  What evidence do you have that ANYTHING in the Bible is accurate?  Please, do share.

Offline holybuckets

  • Emergency Room
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
  • Darwins +3/-34
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #482 on: May 27, 2013, 12:15:36 PM »

I really wish you would.  did you know that the Bible itself is none of those things?  It is nothing more than words on paper, just like any other book.  What evidence do you have that ANYTHING in the Bible is accurate?  Please, do share.
I would be more than happy to. First I would like to establish some ground rules, because as you know, these threads turn into cluster (you know whats) in a hurry.
As I have stated, I will debate with historical evidence, scholarly evidence, and primary sources. Do you have a problem with that Mr Jetson?

Offline Astreja

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3082
  • Darwins +280/-3
  • Gender: Female
  • Agnostic goddess with Clue-by-Four™
    • The Springy Goddess
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #483 on: May 27, 2013, 12:35:42 PM »
I was going to use DNA as well for the proof of God.

Jolly good.  Kindly redirect your DNA worship to Gwen Adenathya Cytosine-Smith, Goddess of Nucleotides.  ;D

(Wot, you think the hissy-fit deity described in the Bible is smart enough to construct organic molecules?  I. Think. Not.)
Reality Checkroom — Not Responsible for Lost Articles

Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5239
  • Darwins +598/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #484 on: May 27, 2013, 12:54:59 PM »
I can give you 100 of these:
I'm sure you can.  You could also give me a closed bag with a hundred coin-shaped objects in it and tell me that they're valuable, but upon examining them, I find pennies (nearly worthless) or wooden nickels (completely worthless).  Sources like this do not show you to be interested in an honest debate on this subject, only that you want to validate your existing belief system.

Quote from: holybuckets
"At that moment, when the DNA/RNA system became understood, the debate between Evolutionists and Creationists should have come to a screeching halt",  I.L. Cohen, Researcher and Mathematician; Member NY Academy of Sciences; Officer of the Archaeological Inst. of America; "Darwin Was Wrong - A Study in Probabilities"; New Research Publications, 1984, p. 4
First off, I cannot find this man's academic credentials, except on creationist websites (such as the one I suspect you pulled it from).  The fact that this limited information about him only appears on creationist websites is highly suspect.

Second, he's described as a mathematician.  Meaning, he is anything but an expert on biology or evolution.  Even Amazon has no actual information on this man.  http://www.amazon.com/I.-L.-Cohen/e/B001KMQ7R2/ref=ntt_dp_epwbk_0

Third, that citation comes from a book published in the mass market, rather than a peer-reviewed publication.  Anyone can write anything they want in a mass market book, without being held to any standard of evidence.  That's why science uses peer review, since it means other people with experience in that field have the opportunity to investigate the findings and check them.

Fourth, his only other works that I could find were called The Secret of Stonehenge, and Urim and Thumim: The Secret of God.  These are not books that would likely be published by a reputable scientist or mathematician, especially not when they constitute two thirds of the man's total published works.

Quote from: holybuckets
So this must prove God exists, right?
Not even slightly.  A random citation from an unknown person who's only credentials appear on a creationist website?  Who's written a grand total of three books and no published papers in peer-reviewed science journals?  Two of which were pure theology, and the third was also primarily theological in nature?

It's like you're playing Breakout, using your credibility as the bricks, holybuckets.  Sources like these don't support your argument - they demolish it.

EDIT--By the way, his statement that the debate between creationists and 'evolutionists' (meaning scientists) should have come to a screeching halt when the DNA/RNA system was understood?  That's a dead giveaway that he doesn't really know what he's talking about, especially given that virtually all biologists - the people who do understand their field, unlike 'mathematicians' like this Cohen, assuming he actually is a mathematician - still accept that DNA evolved.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2013, 01:00:55 PM by jaimehlers »

Offline holybuckets

  • Emergency Room
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
  • Darwins +3/-34
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #485 on: May 27, 2013, 01:02:23 PM »
Jaime,
You are spending a lot of time and we are both saying the same thing.
Neither side can provide scientific evidence that God exists, or does not exist. The score is 0-0.
We must look at other avenues in which evidence is available to prove/disprove that God exists.
I am sorry, this is my last post to you on this subject. It is not fair to me to go round and round and round and round and end up in the same place.
Thanks

Offline Graybeard

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6822
  • Darwins +551/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • Is this going somewhere?
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #486 on: May 27, 2013, 01:03:31 PM »
I will be using 1 Corinthians. It has been verified authentic by scholars across the board.
"All bowling balls are made of marshmallow."

That is an authentic statement by me.

Unfortunately, authenticity of authorship does not equate to authenticity of fact.

Do you wish to try again?
Nobody says “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”

Offline Graybeard

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6822
  • Darwins +551/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • Is this going somewhere?
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #487 on: May 27, 2013, 01:09:32 PM »
Neither side can provide scientific evidence that God exists, or does not exist.
400,000 years of no evidence, and more specifically ~6000 years of people trying to prove God exists and failing, seem pretty conclusive to me.

Want more? How likely is the story of creation or the flood? Think about them - they are false. The creation myths (Gen 1 & 2) were the first time that this god, Yahweh, was introduce to the world, which already had a populace that had other gods. If the introduction is wrong, it is all built on sand, isn't it.

There are no gods of any type or shade.

I will chalk up Atheists 1 - believers in gods 0

What proof of no god would satisfy you?
Nobody says “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”

Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5239
  • Darwins +598/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #488 on: May 27, 2013, 01:19:38 PM »
You are spending a lot of time and we are both saying the same thing.
No, we aren't saying the same thing.  You're just trying to equivocate what I'm saying with what you're saying so you can keep from having to explain why there is no scientific evidence for your god.

Quote from: holybuckets
Neither side can provide scientific evidence that God exists, or does not exist. The score is 0-0.
That is most certainly not true.  Once upon a time, everything that people didn't understand was attributed to 'god'.  Then we started discovering how things actually worked, and since then, more and more of those things have been attributed to natural forces or things that actually exist in the natural world.  Everything from the sun and lightning, down to diseases and drugs, and lots of stuff in between.  Those were all believed to be the actions of supernatural entities (gods and demons) once upon a time, and we have subsequently shown that they were anything but supernatural.

So, the score is not 0-0.  There is a lot of evidence that weakens the case for your god even existing, whereas there is tons of evidence showing that things don't need a supernatural 'causer'.

Quote from: holybuckets
We must look at other avenues in which evidence is available to prove/disprove that God exists.
This is nothing but a convenient way for you to try to get out of answering my points, and I think everyone who reads our exchanges will be able to recognize that fact.

Quote from: holybuckets
I am sorry, this is my last post to you on this subject. It is not fair to me to go round and round and round and round and end up in the same place.
And who do you think is responsible for that, holybuckets?  The reason we're going around and around is because you refuse to acknowledge even the slightest possibility that your religious beliefs might be wrong.  If I were shown to be wrong about this, I would admit it and move on.  I certainly wouldn't play this game that you seem intent on of trying to maintain beliefs at any cost.

But so be it.  I can't force you to respond.  However, I can keep critiquing your posts and showing why they don't work, and I can keep pointing out the flaws in your arguments, logic, and 'evidence'.

Offline holybuckets

  • Emergency Room
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
  • Darwins +3/-34
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #489 on: May 27, 2013, 01:20:54 PM »
I will be using 1 Corinthians. It has been verified authentic by scholars across the board.
"All bowling balls are made of marshmallow."

That is an authentic statement by me.

Unfortunately, authenticity of authorship does not equate to authenticity of fact.

Do you wish to try again?
this is your opinion

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2342
  • Darwins +436/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #490 on: May 27, 2013, 01:22:40 PM »
Jaime,
You are spending a lot of time and we are both saying the same thing.
Neither side can provide scientific evidence that God exists, or does not exist. The score is 0-0.
We must look at other avenues in which evidence is available to prove/disprove that God exists.
I am sorry, this is my last post to you on this subject. It is not fair to me to go round and round and round and round and end up in the same place.
Thanks
Shall we look at other avenues in which evidence is available to prove/disprove that Galactus exists?  How about the universal aether?  Leprechauns?  Unicorns?  The fountain of youth?  How about turtles that go all the way down?
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

- Eddie Izzard

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline holybuckets

  • Emergency Room
  • *****
  • Posts: 574
  • Darwins +3/-34
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #491 on: May 27, 2013, 01:25:07 PM »
Once again we are at the crossroads and you atheists are squirming like worms.
I would like to debate using historical evidence, scholarly evidence and primary evidence.
You bring up Osiris, Bat Boy, the Time Cube, marshmallows and bowling balls.... again, is this the best you got?

Offline shnozzola

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1963
  • Darwins +110/-2
Re: A Challenge to Christians
« Reply #492 on: May 27, 2013, 01:38:37 PM »
.....
Neither side can provide scientific evidence that God exists, or does not exist. The score is 0-0.
We must look at other avenues in which evidence is available to prove/disprove that God exists.
...... fair to me to go round and round and round and round and end up in the same place.
Thanks

This is the crux of the problem.  You are correct Holybuckets.  Now, considering the numbers of Christians vs the number of atheists, and how each side treats the other (and what is fair to each), perhaps you can see why a web site like this is important, both for the safety of people who believe differently, and for the logic in your underlined statement above, yes?
“The best thing for being sad," replied Merlin, beginning to puff and blow, "is to learn something."  ~ T. H. White
  The real holy trinity:  onion, celery, and bell pepper ~  all Cajun Chefs