Author Topic: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?  (Read 9566 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2278
  • Darwins +415/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #145 on: January 12, 2014, 07:35:48 PM »
Of course people from the beginning of time have wrestled with these issues.  That's exactly what one would expect from people who were created in the image of God to do.  Even if they don't know God.

I think you need to connect a few more dots.  It is unclear why I should expect a creature being 'created in the image of god' to wrestle with these issues.  Clarify please.
"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 jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2278
  • Darwins +415/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #146 on: January 12, 2014, 07:38:20 PM »
I am surprised nobody has written a 3rd testament.....well that Smith guy did try,and today he has millions of Mormons believing that crap. Still can we have some jerk-off try and pass his writings off as "inspired by God"?
Could the Quran be considered an attempt at a 3rd testament?
"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 lotanddaughters

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 625
  • Darwins +49/-21
  • Gender: Male
  • Artist: Simon Vouet (1633)
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #147 on: January 12, 2014, 07:42:20 PM »
Christians will emphasize when God heals, so how about when things don't go well? 
In Job, after his sons and daughters were killed and much of his possessions were destroyed:

20 Then Job arose and tore his robe and shaved his head, and he fell to the ground and worshiped. 21 He said,

“Naked I came from my mother’s womb,
And naked I shall return there.
The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away.
Blessed be the name of the Lord.”
22 Through all this Job did not sin nor did he blame God.

Let's take a look at the Book of Job. Shall we?



Job 1:6-8


Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them.


Sons of God? Jesus had brothers? And back then, Jesus wasn't yet important enough to be singled out from among them? Not until the New Testament?

The best explanation is that whoever wrote verse six had an entirely different theology than any New Testament writer. Period.






The Lord said to Satan, “From where do you come?” Then Satan answered the Lord and said, “From roaming about on the earth and walking around on it.”


Here, we once again see evidence that many Old Testament writers didn't endow their fictional construct of a god with absolute knowledge of everything. This human-like god demonstrates his ignorance of first-hand knowledge of events over and over again throughout the Old Testament. The best apologetic that a Christian can try to wedge in is that God is just playing dumb. Still, even if I grant the Christian that, it still renders God a far cry from one supreme being who creates universes. The thing that would actually prevent me from granting even that is the fact that I have never read a verse saying that God plays dumb.







The Lord said to Satan, “Have you considered My servant Job? For there is no one like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, fearing God and turning away from evil.”


Hmmm. What's up with God addressing Satan like he's one of His chums? Actually, this verse fits perfectly with what those "evil atheists" have been screaming all along. "Satan evolved from an agent of God all the way to 'God and Man's greatest enemy', and even took over the identity of a snake in a Garden-- an identity that the original author of the Garden of Eden story never, ever saw coming."

Satan is a myth. The multi-layered god of the Bible is a myth. The sons of God are long-forgotten myths that will bite the fool who believes when I decide to resurrect and unleash them upon the believer who doesn't expect it.

We atheists are stomping out belief. One soul at a time.



Here. I'll even let you have the last word in this post.

God is in a win/win situation.
Enough with your bullshit.
. . . Mr. Friday . . . that post really is golden.

Offline Ataraxia

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 559
  • Darwins +84/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "I am large, I contain multitudes."
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #148 on: January 12, 2014, 08:11:07 PM »
Christianity is based on a heart change that God does to a person.  If a person doesn't see themselves in need of being forgiven of their sins or even having sin in their life, then that person won't believe.

To believe you have sin in your life you first have to believe the Christian god exists, therefore this is just circular reasoning.

Quote
An atheist sees life through the set of lenses that says there is no god.  Therefore he will never be convinced.

No they don't. That would be another of your sweeping generalisations of atheists. Lives/world views are based on what you factor in, not what you factor out.

Quote
God is not my genie in a bottle, that I can conjure up to produce evidence for you to believe.

Then you and your god are useless to this thread and any other requests for evidence. Please stop pretending you have some.
If you think that you don't bring personal biases into your beliefs then you are self deceived.

A non-sequitur and the tu quoque fallacy rolled into one. That's quite impressive.
 
Quote
If you think that I am useless to this thread, then take your nasty personality somewhere else and be done with it.  You've acted this way from the beginning.  You can move on.

We're all done with it now. This thread is explicitly geared to you providing evidence for god, but you can't conjure up evidence for god to give us the potential to believe. You could've saved us all a lot of time and said that you couldn't produce evidence in your first post here, instead of leading us all down this blind alley where you only reply to posts that are convenient enough for you to give an attempt at a response (I mean, you've now bypassed and not acknowledged that it doesn't take complexity for you to believe in intelligent design).

"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." - Voltaire

Offline lotanddaughters

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 625
  • Darwins +49/-21
  • Gender: Male
  • Artist: Simon Vouet (1633)
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #149 on: January 12, 2014, 08:17:43 PM »
You could've saved us all a lot of time and said that you couldn't produce evidence in your first post here, instead of leading us all down this blind alley where you only reply to posts that are convenient enough for you to give an attempt at a response (I mean, you've now bypassed and not acknowledged that it doesn't take complexity for you to believe in intelligent design).

Well said.

I sure wish he would attempt to respond to that masterpiece by kcrady[1](Reply #110, page 4).

 1. Oh yeah. I forgot that Satan has probably evolved into kcrady by now.
Enough with your bullshit.
. . . Mr. Friday . . . that post really is golden.

Offline Ataraxia

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 559
  • Darwins +84/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "I am large, I contain multitudes."
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #150 on: January 12, 2014, 08:20:53 PM »
You could've saved us all a lot of time and said that you couldn't produce evidence in your first post here, instead of leading us all down this blind alley where you only reply to posts that are convenient enough for you to give an attempt at a response (I mean, you've now bypassed and not acknowledged that it doesn't take complexity for you to believe in intelligent design).

Well said.

I sure wish he would attempt to respond to that masterpiece by kcrady[1](Reply #110, page 4).
 1. Oh yeah. I forgot that Satan has probably evolved into kcrady by now.

To be fair, he has in Reply #143. Whether it is extensive enough is another question, though he is getting back to it.
"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." - Voltaire

Offline lotanddaughters

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 625
  • Darwins +49/-21
  • Gender: Male
  • Artist: Simon Vouet (1633)
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #151 on: January 12, 2014, 08:24:46 PM »
You could've saved us all a lot of time and said that you couldn't produce evidence in your first post here, instead of leading us all down this blind alley where you only reply to posts that are convenient enough for you to give an attempt at a response (I mean, you've now bypassed and not acknowledged that it doesn't take complexity for you to believe in intelligent design).

Well said.

I sure wish he would attempt to respond to that masterpiece by kcrady[1](Reply #110, page 4).
 1. Oh yeah. I forgot that Satan has probably evolved into kcrady by now.

To be fair, he has in Reply #143. Whether it is extensive enough is another question, though he is getting back to it.

Thank you so much. I've been waiting to read a response since this morning. I must've missed it.

Patrick, I recant my statement concerning your response. Thank you for responding to kcrady.
Enough with your bullshit.
. . . Mr. Friday . . . that post really is golden.

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #152 on: January 12, 2014, 11:45:50 PM »
The way I look at this question is - who is asking and why? Let me explain.
I have two kids one older than the other by 5 years. The older one knows a lot of stuff that the younger one does not know that he was taught in school. So whenever the younger one asks the older a difficult question Like where o babies come from - the older bamboozles him knowing fully he would not understand what he is talking about and so he responds that they come from the vegetable patch. The younger one then leaves baffled and none the wiser. When he comes to me I tell him he will learn the true answer in time - knowing fully well he will eventually. Everything is knowable but time must be applied to the learning process. The truth can be explained but of what use is it if the child is not ready?
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline Patrick Henry

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 88
  • Darwins +7/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #153 on: January 12, 2014, 11:54:15 PM »

This does not provide evidence for Christianity.  The "Argument From Evil" is actually one of the main evidences against the existence of an all-powerful, all-good creator deity with omnimax attributes (omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, omnibenevolence).  Leaping straight to Christianity here also represents a fallacy of Locating the Hypothesis.  More on this below. 

2. I have reason to believe in the authenticity of the bible

Not sure what you mean by "authenticity of the Bible" here.  If you're arguing something along the lines of, "The Bible said that Nineveh was real; the archaeologists thought it was a myth until they found it, therefore the Bible is God's infallible Word!," that is no more to the point than assuming that because Troy and Mycenae were found, therefore the Goddess Athena must exist.  Again, you're jumping straight to the Bible for no apparent reason.  Have you tested the Upanishads for authenticity?  Locating the Hypothesis again.


3. The bible also admits the problem of good and evil
4. The bible states that the ability for good and evil exists in people.  Which I see evidence of.
5. The bible states that mankind needs to be taught what good and evil are.  Otherwise, if left to their own devices, man will deviate into a place where he hurts and destroys himself and others around him. I see evidence of this throughout history and in today's world.

Outside of, maybe, a few hand-wringing French Existentialists and postmodernist academics, you'd have a hard time finding any philosophical or religious text that doesn't admit the problem of good and evil, and state that good and evil exist in people.  If you're guessing that I'll mention "Locating the Hypothesis" again here, you'd be right.

Second part of this answer:  Since you continued to refer to "locate the hypothesis", which is as I understand, means that a person must have enough rational evidence already in hand to locate a truth where many possible answers may exist.  What is the evidence or rational reason for choosing to believe in a Christian God?   
I've given my reasons for exploration, but for the continuance, I'll refer you to a website that I go to from time to time.  It's called Reasons To Believe, started by Hugh Ross, a PhD in Astrophysics along with other science fellows.   http://www.reasons.org/explore/topic/age-of-the-earth

Offline Patrick Henry

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 88
  • Darwins +7/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #154 on: January 13, 2014, 12:41:28 AM »

Let's take a look at the Book of Job. Shall we?

Job 1:6-8


Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them.


Sons of God? Jesus had brothers? And back then, Jesus wasn't yet important enough to be singled out from among them? Not until the New Testament?
  See ancient Hebrew word counts.  There wasn't that many words available in the ancient Hebrew usage, so they had multiple meanings.  sons of God in this context meant created beings.  Not the same as Jesus.   
Quote

The best explanation is that whoever wrote verse six had an entirely different theology than any New Testament writer. Period.

Nope, since Paul quotes from the book of Job, I'd have to disagree.  Rom 11:35-36
Quote

The Lord said to Satan, “From where do you come?” Then Satan answered the Lord and said, “From roaming about on the earth and walking around on it.”

Here, we once again see evidence that many Old Testament writers didn't endow their fictional construct of a god with absolute knowledge of everything. This human-like god demonstrates his ignorance of first-hand knowledge of events over and over again throughout the Old Testament. The best apologetic that a Christian can try to wedge in is that God is just playing dumb. Still, even if I grant the Christian that, it still renders God a far cry from one supreme being who creates universes. The thing that would actually prevent me from granting even that is the fact that I have never read a verse saying that God plays dumb. 

What did God say to Adam?  "Who told you that you were naked?"  What did God say to Cain?  "Where is your brother?"   
Quote

The Lord said to Satan, “Have you considered My servant Job? For there is no one like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, fearing God and turning away from evil.”


Hmmm. What's up with God addressing Satan like he's one of His chums? Actually, this verse fits perfectly with what those "evil atheists" have been screaming all along. "Satan evolved from an agent of God all the way to 'God and Man's greatest enemy', and even took over the identity of a snake in a Garden-- an identity that the original author of the Garden of Eden story never, ever saw coming."

Satan is a myth. The multi-layered god of the Bible is a myth. The sons of God are long-forgotten myths that will bite the fool who believes when I decide to resurrect and unleash them upon the believer who doesn't expect it.
  Sounds like a big conspiracy.   
Quote

We atheists are stomping out belief. One soul at a time.
Then you'll need to brush up a little.

Offline Patrick Henry

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 88
  • Darwins +7/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #155 on: January 13, 2014, 12:59:28 AM »

We're all done with it now. This thread is explicitly geared to you providing evidence for god, but you can't conjure up evidence for god to give us the potential to believe. You could've saved us all a lot of time and said that you couldn't produce evidence in your first post here, instead of leading us all down this blind alley where you only reply to posts that are convenient enough for you to give an attempt at a response (I mean, you've now bypassed and not acknowledged that it doesn't take complexity for you to believe in intelligent design).
Yes we are done.  Truth is, your arrogant insults prevented us from ever getting started. 

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #156 on: January 13, 2014, 01:48:48 AM »

We're all done with it now. This thread is explicitly geared to you providing evidence for god, but you can't conjure up evidence for god to give us the potential to believe. You could've saved us all a lot of time and said that you couldn't produce evidence in your first post here, instead of leading us all down this blind alley where you only reply to posts that are convenient enough for you to give an attempt at a response (I mean, you've now bypassed and not acknowledged that it doesn't take complexity for you to believe in intelligent design).
Yes we are done.  Truth is, your arrogant insults prevented us from ever getting started.
So long as the question remains they will have to seek the answer. That is what intelligence demands of the questioner -- otherwise one remains a fool to the truth of the wisdom of the Theists who bring us the word God time an time again.
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline Ataraxia

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 559
  • Darwins +84/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "I am large, I contain multitudes."
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #157 on: January 13, 2014, 04:33:05 AM »

We're all done with it now. This thread is explicitly geared to you providing evidence for god, but you can't conjure up evidence for god to give us the potential to believe. You could've saved us all a lot of time and said that you couldn't produce evidence in your first post here, instead of leading us all down this blind alley where you only reply to posts that are convenient enough for you to give an attempt at a response (I mean, you've now bypassed and not acknowledged that it doesn't take complexity for you to believe in intelligent design).
Yes we are done.  Truth is, your arrogant insults prevented us from ever getting started.

Yet on the evidence front, you've not managed to get started with anyone else either. The common denominator here is not my "nasty and arrogant behaviour", but you and your now admitted failure to be able to provide evidence.

Really, all I have done is try and help you out by mainly showing you that your belief in complexity being a calling card for intelligent design is erroneous (and if I am wrong in that, then explain, otherwise concede the point). Yes, perhaps I could've approached you in a less forthright manner and if I have offended you then I apologise. However, don't get all prissy over being labelled an idiot regarding human evolution, when you obviously feel at home responding in kind by calling me nasty and arrogant.
 
"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." - Voltaire

Offline Ataraxia

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 559
  • Darwins +84/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "I am large, I contain multitudes."
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #158 on: January 13, 2014, 06:15:49 AM »
So long as the question remains they will have to seek the answer. That is what intelligence demands of the questioner -- otherwise one remains a fool to the truth of the wisdom of the Theists who bring us the word God time an time again.

That's the human condition - we have a thirst for knowledge. We crave to understand the world in which we inhabit because it has the potential for us to live healthier, easier and more prosperous lives.

What we here from some theists is that they know things and have answers to some pretty fundamental questions, so like anybody else, they have the right to take the floor and explain these answers and their conclusions.....

...except they don't. They get on stage waving their arms in the air, relaying assertion after assertion without any evidence to back them up, yet expect the rest of us to take these claims seriously even when they wouldn't approve of this standard in any other walk of life. Even when they themselves admit to not being able to produce any evidence for their assertive answers, they expect us to carry on listening and taking heed. Well we won't. Due to our quest for knowing things and with our time and resources being limited, you are simply wasting them. Why not just drop this shoe you carry around like one of Brian's followers and actually use your time up more constructively and search for answers that you can actually back up?
"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." - Voltaire

Offline Anfauglir

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6198
  • Darwins +408/-5
  • Gender: Male
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #159 on: January 13, 2014, 06:57:54 AM »
So long as the question remains they will have to seek the answer. That is what intelligence demands of the questioner -- otherwise one remains a fool to the truth of the wisdom of the Theists who bring us the word God time an time again.

Not really.  When you ask the same question over and over again - "where is the evidence?" - and you are never shown any, then at some point the intelligent thing to do is to assume there isn't any and to stop asking.

When did you stop seeking evidence for Atum, may I ask?
Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.
Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?

Offline Quesi

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +371/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #160 on: January 13, 2014, 08:07:09 AM »
The way I look at this question is - who is asking and why? Let me explain.
I have two kids one older than the other by 5 years. The older one knows a lot of stuff that the younger one does not know that he was taught in school. So whenever the younger one asks the older a difficult question Like where o babies come from - the older bamboozles him knowing fully he would not understand what he is talking about and so he responds that they come from the vegetable patch. The younger one then leaves baffled and none the wiser. When he comes to me I tell him he will learn the true answer in time - knowing fully well he will eventually. Everything is knowable but time must be applied to the learning process. The truth can be explained but of what use is it if the child is not ready?

Yeah.  I look at things in a similar way.

Thousands of years ago, human beings had no idea that they lived on a globe, that was part of a solar system, on the arm of a galaxy, that was one of billions of galaxies in the universe.  Their whole universe did not stretch far beyond the horizon. 

And like your younger son, they asked big questions. Like "where did our universe come from?"

And they came up with all kinds of different answers.  Cosmic eggs.  Pantheons of playful or spiteful or bumbling deities.  Sky god. 

They did not understand weather patterns.  So a serious local flood, (like Katrina) certainly seemed to encompass the whole world.  It stretched as far as the eye could see.  And that is all they knew.

But today, we know so much more.  Most of us here are baffled by the folks who come to the forum, insisting that babies come from the vegetable patch.     

Offline Jesuis

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
  • Darwins +10/-160
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #161 on: January 15, 2014, 06:45:49 PM »
So long as the question remains they will have to seek the answer. That is what intelligence demands of the questioner -- otherwise one remains a fool to the truth of the wisdom of the Theists who bring us the word God time an time again.

Not really.  When you ask the same question over and over again - "where is the evidence?" - and you are never shown any, then at some point the intelligent thing to do is to assume there isn't any and to stop asking.

When did you stop seeking evidence for Atum, may I ask?
I have to finally agree with that. Been doing it for far to long on here and had no intelligent responses. Nothing, nada Zilch.
According to Theists: Theists know God, Atheists don't.

Offline Ivellios

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1077
  • Darwins +52/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Seek and Ye Shall Find
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #162 on: January 15, 2014, 08:12:42 PM »
Nothing, nada Zilch.

If you're gonna copy someone, please get it right.  :P

Been doing it for far to long on here and had no intelligent responses.

There have been intelligent responses. Instead of simply disagreeing with them, you make the claim that they're stupid. If there's anyone that's made "no intelligent responses" with you, it's the person who is unable to communicate with the community, ie. look in a mirror, that's right, you.

To quesi's post you replied 'all the above,' but someone who refuses to communicate in an effective manner will accomplish exactly none of those things. In my opinion, you either need to increase your knowledge base in real world things, learn to be a better communicator, or both. If you're unwilling to do those things, it's simply because you're either a poe or troll.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2014, 08:22:13 PM by Ivellios »

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4663
  • Darwins +106/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #163 on: January 16, 2014, 12:34:23 AM »
I am surprised nobody has written a 3rd testament.....well that Smith guy did try,and today he has millions of Mormons believing that crap. Still can we have some jerk-off try and pass his writings off as "inspired by God"?
Could the Quran be considered an attempt at a 3rd testament?
Considering the same God and the amount of new followers yearly,I guess you could consider it the 3rd testament..,, They have hijacked the God of the Christians,the same way the Christians hijacked the God of the Jews
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline Fiji

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1323
  • Darwins +89/-2
  • Gender: Male
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #164 on: January 16, 2014, 02:10:54 AM »
^^ Not only could you consider the quran as such ... the quran expressly states that it IS a third testament.
Science: I'll believe it when I see it
Faith: I'll see it when I believe it

Schrodinger's thunderdome! One cat enters and one MIGHT leave!

Without life, god has no meaning.

Offline Patrick Henry

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 88
  • Darwins +7/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #165 on: January 18, 2014, 04:34:31 PM »

We're all done with it now. This thread is explicitly geared to you providing evidence for god, but you can't conjure up evidence for god to give us the potential to believe. You could've saved us all a lot of time and said that you couldn't produce evidence in your first post here, instead of leading us all down this blind alley where you only reply to posts that are convenient enough for you to give an attempt at a response (I mean, you've now bypassed and not acknowledged that it doesn't take complexity for you to believe in intelligent design).
Yes we are done.  Truth is, your arrogant insults prevented us from ever getting started.
Yet on the evidence front, you've not managed to get started with anyone else either. The common denominator here is not my "nasty and arrogant behaviour", but you and your now admitted failure to be able to provide evidence.

Really, all I have done is try and help you out by mainly showing you that your belief in complexity being a calling card for intelligent design is erroneous (and if I am wrong in that, then explain, otherwise concede the point). Yes, perhaps I could've approached you in a less forthright manner and if I have offended you then I apologise. However, don't get all prissy over being labelled an idiot regarding human evolution, when you obviously feel at home responding in kind by calling me nasty and arrogant.
Ataraxia,
I've not had a chance to get on the board much since this last conversation.  I've been thinking about it and want to respond to you.  First of all, I'm not so "offended" by your remarks, but instead, am setting up boundaries for decent dialogue so that it does not digress into name calling, like so many other debates of personal topics can do.  We see it all over the internet, especially when people are relatively anonymous, they tend to say things that aren't very helpful towards a better community.  That effort, I hope is reflective of my core belief in treating people with respect and kindness.  Calling you arrogant was something that I recognized as evident by your posts and your subsequent defense of name calling.  However, I apologize for what I said.  I admit that I was a bit tired when I typed it out and wasn't at my best.  So I apologize for it, and am willing to carry on a conversation if you are. 
I've also re-read your reply #70 and I think probably read through it too fast in the first place.  So I'm trying to see it from your point of view and will answer it to the best of my ability.  As soon as I can get time this weekend.   
Fair enough? 

Offline Ataraxia

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 559
  • Darwins +84/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "I am large, I contain multitudes."
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #166 on: January 19, 2014, 05:31:21 AM »
Really, there is no need to apologise. All I'd like is for you to address my points head on, and if now you're going to attempt that, then fair play. I look forward to reading it.
"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." - Voltaire

Offline Patrick Henry

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 88
  • Darwins +7/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #167 on: January 21, 2014, 12:22:13 AM »
Think about it:
God creates nature;
Nature includes evolution;
Evolution has the ability to create "soulish" qualities;
Evolution doesn't have the ability to create a soul;
God has to intervene in the nature he created for bodies to harbour a soul.

Right, so it is clear from this that a soul by itself is alive. This means that humans alive now in this world are alive twice if the human body is classed as alive even without a soul, which you do as you have stated above with "living body". Why is this necessary for humans, and why don't all these other animals that don't have a soul not get the chance to have an eternal life, just because they haven't evolved enough for god to interject and stick a soul in their bodies? It's almost as if the ability to have "soul" qualities follows evolution via natural selection....

This is more evidence that goes to show that all you are doing is believing what you believe because you want to believe it. Yes, god could have done anything any way he wanted. You are taking bits from what we have discovered (old earth, old universe) and ignoring what the bible states about that, even though you acknowledge that god could have made the earth in a literal 6 days. However, then on the other hand, you are ignoring what we have discovered (human evolution) and take a punt on what the bible says about how humans have come about.

This belief system of yours is all of your own making. You really are just believing what you want to believe, no matter how contradictory it is and no matter how much it goes against what can be observed and measured. This is the big problem that all theists face, all because they believe in an all powerful, omnipotent being that can do anything. You see, at some point you all go, "well, he could've done that, but he didn't, and I know this because my special ancient text tells me so". Then you get the cherry pickers like yourself, who are pinning everything on this text, but only on occasion. I despair, really I do.
In our earlier conversation about what a soul is, and who has one, you brought up evolution a few times in your response.  I've read quite a bit of evolution science and I've seen many fossils, but it still seems to me that it is a theory rather than fact.  That there is a leap from fossil finds (which is evidence) to conclusions (which is theory), about where species came from.  I've noticed that no matter how hard people try, everyone has a bias.  If you and I bring different biases into the same room, we may come out with completely different conclusions about the same evidence presented to us.  The only way that we could come out with the same conclusions is if there was conclusive evidence, and we both agree to let the evidence dissolve the bias.   Now, I admit that chimps, apes, and such look similar to humans compared to other creatures.  But I don't think that is conclusive enough evidence.  (Though I think it can set up a bias).  Since it isn't enough to draw a conclusion of evolution based on just the look of one species to another, we need evidence of transition.  Since evolutionists teach that everything is "transitional", then we will never find the "missing link", but should we should expect a series of transitions over a long period of time. 
Since you brought evolution into the discussion I perceive that it is very important to you.  I would like to know what you believe is the proof of evolution?  Is there a transitional fossil or a few that are your favorites to point to?  Or is it the whole of evolutionary biology that is so convincing? 
I would like to read about what you think are the best evidences.  I'll take some time and read it, in case there is evidence that I'm not aware of. 

Offline Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2756
  • Darwins +222/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburger™
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #168 on: January 21, 2014, 12:58:08 AM »
  Now, I admit that chimps, apes, and such look similar to humans compared to other creatures.  But I don't think that is conclusive enough evidence.

You gotta admit more than that, deary.

Even rats have the same hormones and enzymes as humans; that's why drugs can be tested on them. The DNA evidence of how animals and plants are chemically related in a tree, is something you also have to admit.
Humans, in general, don't waste any opportunity to be unfathomably stupid - Dr Cynical.

Offline Fiji

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1323
  • Darwins +89/-2
  • Gender: Male
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #169 on: January 21, 2014, 03:02:25 AM »
Since it isn't enough to draw a conclusion of evolution based on just the look of one species to another, we need evidence of transition.  Since evolutionists teach that everything is "transitional", then we will never find the "missing link", but should we should expect a series of transitions over a long period of time. 
Ok, which transitional form would you like? Which one would clinch the deal? The one between Homo sapiens and Homo heidelbergensis? Or maybe the one between Homo heidelbergensis and Homo antecessor. Or the one between Homo antecessor and Homo erectus?

Tell you what, I'll post a list of our ancestors all the way back to the split between great and lesser apes and you tell us at which point the ancestors were not yet humans ... or at which point the Ancient Hebrew wargod went, "hm, I like that one, I'll stuff a soul into him/her."

Homo sapiens
Homo heidelbergensis
Homo antecessor
Homo erectus
Homo habilis
Australopithecus africanus
Australopithecus afarensis
Kenyanthropus platyops
Ardipithecus ramidus
Orrorin tugenensis
Pierolapithecus catalaunicus
Hominidae

There you go, which one would clinch the deal?
Science: I'll believe it when I see it
Faith: I'll see it when I believe it

Schrodinger's thunderdome! One cat enters and one MIGHT leave!

Without life, god has no meaning.

Offline wheels5894

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2699
  • Darwins +114/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #170 on: January 21, 2014, 03:28:38 AM »
Patrick Henry,

It would be interesting to discuss Evolution with you but this isn't the thread for it. Start a new thread if you would like to discuss - I'll even take you on in a one to one debate on the issue. However, not now.

This thread is to let you present your evidence for the existence of a god. We are now on page 6 and you have still not done so. Please Present your evidence and don't get sidetracked.

Oh, and let me know if you would like to debate Evolution with me.
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 Ataraxia

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 559
  • Darwins +84/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "I am large, I contain multitudes."
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #171 on: January 21, 2014, 04:04:00 AM »
First of all, before I get started, this is a thread set up for you to provide evidence for god. This is not a thread for you to turn the conversation around and ask for evidence regarding an unrelated topic. If you want to discuss this, start a thread. I will respond below with the notion that this may be split off into another thread by the mods.

Secondly, because of this I am disappointed in your response because it totally bypasses the conversation of what a soul is and why complexity isn't a valid argument for intelligent design when you simultaneously state that all is created by god whether complex or not. This is the main issue, and you are trying to brush it under the carpet without anyone noticing.

Anyway....

In our earlier conversation about what a soul is, and who has one, you brought up evolution a few times in your response.  I've read quite a bit of evolution science and I've seen many fossils, but it still seems to me that it is a theory rather than fact.

Evolution is an observable fact. The Theory of Evolution is our best explanation of how evolution works. It's the same with gravity and the same with the atom - we have observable facts that are explained by theories. If you are going to get hung up on a theory then it should be the current theory of gravity because we know it's wrong. If you can't make the distinction between fact and theory then any further conversation is pointless.

Also, I'm nor sure where you have a problem with evolution. It's not clear whether it's a full, blown out rejection of evolution or just the evolution of humans. Please clarify.

Quote
That there is a leap from fossil finds (which is evidence) to conclusions (which is theory), about where species came from.  I've noticed that no matter how hard people try, everyone has a bias.

We also find and observe a change in gene frequency[1] over time. We label that evolution. Fossil records are just one source of evidence. DNA is another. Why antibiotics are becoming less and less useful at getting rid of infections is another. The fact that you aren't a clone of your father is another.

Yes, everyone has bias. So what? I do not bring any specialised, one-off bias forward for evolution. The biases I bring forth for evolution are consistently used for a smorgasbord of things. I believe on taking what appears to happen in the observable world as a good indicator for what happens in the observable world. Evolution is one of those things like gravity is. You are the one who is using a specialised bias to conclude that gravity is a fact but evolution isn't.

Quote
If you and I bring different biases into the same room, we may come out with completely different conclusions about the same evidence presented to us.  The only way that we could come out with the same conclusions is if there was conclusive evidence, and we both agree to let the evidence dissolve the bias.

No, the way to dissolve this is to be consistent with biases and apply them across the board to everything. We can't live without bias, so this is the next best thing, but you are not doing this.

Quote
Now, I admit that chimps, apes, and such look similar to humans compared to other creatures.  But I don't think that is conclusive enough evidence.  (Though I think it can set up a bias).

Firstly, we are apes. But you're right, just because we look similar comapared to other creatures isn't conclusive enough. for example, there are species in Madagascar that resemble hedgehogs, but they have different lineages. This is called convergent evolution.
However, we have evidence from DNA that we are related to other apes. For example, chromosome 2 in humans has a near identical DNA sequence to chimps, but in a chimp they are two separate chromosomes. The same can be said for gorillas and orangutans.

Quote
Since it isn't enough to draw a conclusion of evolution based on just the look of one species to another, we need evidence of transition.  Since evolutionists teach that everything is "transitional", then we will never find the "missing link", but should we should expect a series of transitions over a long period of time.

This is the creationist ploy, and that is there'll always be a missing link, because even when you fill in a gap between two organisms, you create two more gaps. Then you fill them in and create four more gaps etc. Thing is, there are fossils out there already where you will struggle to tell whether it is "human" or "not human".

We see transition every time I new organism is born. We are all transitional forms. That is why we are not clones. This is due to a change in gene frequency. This is evolution.

Quote
Since you brought evolution into the discussion I perceive that it is very important to you.  I would like to know what you believe is the proof of evolution?  Is there a transitional fossil or a few that are your favorites to point to?  Or is it the whole of evolutionary biology that is so convincing?

Yes, I brought up evolution and you've taken that baton and ran with it, leaving behind the actual discussion. Please don't do this again with me.

Anyway, evolution is not important to me. I don't care whether it is a fact or not. All I'm interested in is finding out what are facts, and facts can be found out by observing the world. Evolution just so happens to be one of those observations.
 
Quote
I would like to read about what you think are the best evidences.  I'll take some time and read it, in case there is evidence that I'm not aware of.

Then you haven't "read quite a lot of evolution science", have you? Really, I've explained why evolution is a fact and explained the distinction between that and the theory that explains it. I suggest you knock yourself out at talkorigins, rather than me reel off a load of observable instances of evolution.
 1. Agh, Jesuis!
"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." - Voltaire

Offline pianodwarf

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 4371
  • Darwins +208/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Je bois ton lait frappé
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #172 on: January 21, 2014, 06:34:57 AM »
In our earlier conversation about what a soul is, and who has one, you brought up evolution a few times in your response.  I've read quite a bit of evolution science and I've seen many fossils, but it still seems to me that it is a theory rather than fact.

Patrick, are you by any chance a fan of "Law and Order", "CSI", or any other type of police procedural television show?  If not, let me explain the idea briefly.

A typical episode goes something like this: a murder victim's body is discovered.  The police begin their investigation by figuring out who the victim is and creating a "suspect pool".  Once they've gathered a certain amount of evidence, they come up with their prime suspect -- having done so, they are said to have created a "theory of the homicide".  For example, if the victim was married and had a huge insurance policy naming the wife as the beneficiary, their prime suspect may be the wife.  The "theory of the homicide", then, is that the wife killed the husband for the money.

So they find the wife to see whether she has an alibi.  She says she does, saying that she was on a business trip in another state, and she offers the names of colleagues and coworkers who were with her on the trip.  The detectives check with those people, and they confirm her story.  This means that the detectives' "theory of the homicide" is incorrect.  It does NOT mean that the victim is still alive.

Now, do you understand where I'm going with this, or do I need to explain it to you further?
« Last Edit: January 21, 2014, 06:41:10 AM by pianodwarf »
[On how kangaroos could have gotten back to Australia after the flood]:  Don't kangaroos skip along the surface of the water? --Kenn

Offline kcrady

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1324
  • Darwins +433/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Your Friendly Neighborhood Cephalopod Overlord
    • My blog
Re: for Patrick Henry - what evidence is there that god really exists?
« Reply #173 on: January 21, 2014, 11:01:37 AM »
Of course people from the beginning of time have wrestled with these issues.  That's exactly what one would expect from people who were created in the image of God to do.  Even if they don't know God.

Now, I don't make a "leap".

But...you just did.  Can you see it?  You say that "wrestling with these issues" is an anticipated consequence of people being "created in the image of [your particular] God," but offer no indication of how you got from Point A to Point Bible, much less any actual chain of evidence that locates the hypothesis you chose over countless others. 

We can observe, daily, the presence of curiosity in animals (cats, dogs, etc.) that are not, in any mainstream version of Christian theology, "created in the image of God."  Most Christian theologians would tell us that Yahweh already knows everything, so it is metaphysically impossible for him to be curious or wrestle with a difficult question.  Therefore, there is no information content in the phrase "created in the image of God" that can lead to anticipating that humans would be curious and wrestle with philosophical questions.

Since curiosity is a trait we share with other animals, it's easy to assert that this is an anticipated consequence of naturalistic evolution.  Or we could say it's because our bodies and Ka's were fashioned by Khnum, who created us to live in accordance with the principles of Ma'at (truth and the proper cosmic order; also personified as a goddess).  Or...pretty much every single religion and philosophy ever invented.

The reasons that I gave were just a beginning.  I don't leap from the existential concept to.... American Protestantism.

You may not see yourself doing it because "the Bible is true" is just one of those "everybody knows that!" things to you, so that you're not able to genuinely step outside of your world-view long enough to look at it the way an outsider would.  Like a fish that never notices the presence of water.  If you'd been born in New Delhi, then the truth of Hinduism would be equally "obvious."  You would have no more expectation that the answers would be found in a Jewish book than you currently have of finding them in the Vedas.

First is accepting the idea that we are more than just an accident.  And more than just a physical creature destined for the dust without a soul or something else, whatever that might be.

This is no better a reason to believe in Yahweh than "But I don't want there to be a big boss in the sky who has rules for what I can do with my genitals!" is a good reason to disbelieve in him.

This is motivated cognition--enshrining some particular desire (whether it be for "immortality, meaning, and purpose" or "free love" or "I wanna have psychic powers and talk to aliens" or something else) as a bias, then setting out to make the facts of reality conform.  It should be obvious that this is not a good way to find out what reality is actually like. 

After at least considering that possibility, a person can enter into a journey of discovering what that something else could be.

Again, this methodology is completely bass-ackwards.  First we set out on our journey of discovery--employing methods for discovering facts and identifying errors and biases--then we find out what possibilities are worthy of consideration (i.e., probable), and which ones aren't.

That you don't see a reason for God to create people........well the bible says that God loves His creation.  Maybe that's a good enough reason.  As parents and people with family, we should be able to relate to that.

When we talk about love, in particular, parental love, the word is supposed to mean something.  It is fairly easy to specify a set of behaviors that identify an individual as a loving parent.  It is also fairly easy to specify behaviors that qualify as "abusive" or "neglectful."  In other words, we can tell, by observation, whether or not a given person is a loving parent.  We have governmental departments set up to do this in order to protect children from abuse and neglect.

So, if you're wanting to claim that Yahweh is a loving parent, then you're making a testable claim.  In a nutshell: loving parents look out for their children, and act within the extent of their knowledge and abilities to protect them.  Children with loving parents never wonder if said parents exist or not. 

We all know that Yahweh doesn't behave as a loving parent.  If he did, you wouldn't have to use motivated cognition to uphold your belief in him.  You could just say, "Remember when he stopped that Hitler guy from trying to kill all the Jews and start a war that would have killed tens of millions of people?" or "Remember when he stopped those airliners from colliding with the World Trade Center?"  Now of course you've got all kinds of theological reasons for why Yahweh never actually does anything, or so much as shows up to give any of the children he "loves" a hug or a shoulder to cry on.  But the more you apply those, the more you tear down the claim that he can be understood as being a "loving parent" in any meaningful sense of the term.  The problem you have is that Yahweh doesn't exhibit any kind of behavior pattern at all out in the real world.  Sure, he does stuff in stories in books, but then, so does Harry Potter.

The Bible says that God knew you from the beginning of the earth.  That He created you for a reason.  If God is who He says He is, and does love His creation, then people who know Him will WANT to bow down and sing His praises.  He doesn't force anyone to do that.

Are you sure?

Quote
For it is written,

“As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me,
    and every tongue shall give praise to God.”

Romans 14:11, New Revised Standard Version

Quote
And she gave birth to a son, a male child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron. But her child was snatched away and taken to God and to his throne;

--Revelation 12:5, NRSV


Quote
From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule[a] them with a rod of iron; he will tread the wine press of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. On his robe and on his thigh he has a name inscribed, “King of kings and Lord of lords.”

--Revelation 19:14-16

For someone who professes to "believe in" the Bible, you don't seem all that familiar with it.  I wish that all the nice, ethical, modern Christians who want to go around saying, "Oh no, God isn't mean!  He doesn't ever bully anyone into worshiping him or torture them in Hell for doing something else for their lives!  He just wants to hand out big huggy bunches of love and welcome everyone into the Democracy of Heaven!" would have the integrity to hold a new Church Council and go through the Bible with a red pen lining out all the horrible barbaric crap to produce a text as nice as they are.  While you're at it, maybe you can clear out the "begats" and some of those laborious descriptions of altars and tables and washing-bowls for animal sacrifices.  Then you'd have room to put in more relevant stuff like, oh, I dunno, Martin Luther King's Letter From a Birmingham Jail

Re: the issues of good and evil:  Good and evil are definitions of standards.  We would have to get into the problem of where our standards come from.  Are they floating or fixed?

Let's see...

Quote
About noon the next day, as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. He became hungry and wanted something to eat; and while it was being prepared, he fell into a trance. He saw the heaven opened and something like a large sheet coming down, being lowered to the ground by its four corners. In it were all kinds of four-footed creatures and reptiles and birds of the air. Then he heard a voice saying, “Get up, Peter; kill and eat.” But Peter said, “By no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is profane or unclean.” The voice said to him again, a second time, “What God has made clean, you must not call profane.” This happened three times, and the thing was suddenly taken up to heaven.

--Acts 10:9-16, NRSV


Floating, right?  Right?


I see that good and evil exist and it causes me to look for a good/evil standard and reason why.  The bible answers those questions.  I know other "holy books" claim answers too.  Yes, I've read many of them but not all.  That doesn't mean that landing on just the right truth was a coincidence.  I don't see this as a choice as much as I see it as God's leading me and giving me reasons to believe at the same time.

And everybody else's gods and goddesses "led them" to believe in their religions, right?  I'm sure many if not most would say that sort of thing.  As an outsider without any deities leading me around, why should I not consider their claims as valid as yours? 

Burning forever may be a metaphorical explaination of hell.

Or it may not.  There's lots of Christians who exhibit absolute certainty in the truth of "literal," "metaphorical" and "meh, that was primitive people talking, God has lead us on from there" views and various admixtures thereof.  Which ought to be a clue that the methodology of Christianity doesn't work when it comes to seeking truth and identifying error.

Forever seperation from God is probably one thing that christians can agree upon regarding this subject.  That it burns like an unquenchable fire because the person will never have satifaction in their existance, always searching and never able to experience relationship, contentment, always blaming God for even being in hell, will certainly be a part of that eternal existance.  But hey, at least God is giving the person what they wanted right?  Seperation from Himself.  A lot atheists say that even if the God of the bible were true, they wouldn't want to be with Him.  A loving God, I suppose, gives them what they want in the end. 

We are all perfectly, 100% hermetically sealed off and "separate from" Yahweh.  If it were otherwise, this Forum would not exist, you wouldn't be being asked for evidence for him (and you wouldn't be so completely unable to provide it) any more than you're asked for evidence that the Sun exists.  You live in the same godless universe we do.  Welcome to "Hell," I guess.   
« Last Edit: January 21, 2014, 12:36:11 PM by kcrady »
"The question of whether atheists are, you know, right, typically gets sidestepped in favor of what is apparently the much more compelling question of whether atheists are jerks."

--Greta Christina