Total Posts:40|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Without GOD

Passionate
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 7:15:57 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Those who have tried to understand the Universe without recourse to the Book of God are just like those blind people who try to find out what an elephant is by touching different parts of its body. One will touch its leg, and think he has found a pillar. Another will feel its ear, and think it is a winnowing basket. Its back will be proclaimed a platform, its tail a snake and its trunk a hosepipe. But where in all this is the elephant? No matter how these blind people put together their findings, they cannot arrive at the correct answer. This is the eternal predicament of all atheist philosophers and thinkers. In their attempt to fathom the nature of reality in the universe, they have failed to be guided by true knowledge. As a result, their conclusions have been like those of a man, fumbling in the dark, and just hazarding wild guesses as to the nature of his surroundings, without ever truly understanding it.
Passionate
bulproof
Posts: 25,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 9:27:10 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 7:15:57 AM, Passionate wrote:
Those who have tried to understand the Universe without recourse to the Book of God are just like those blind people who try to find out what an elephant is by touching different parts of its body. One will touch its leg, and think he has found a pillar. Another will feel its ear, and think it is a winnowing basket. Its back will be proclaimed a platform, its tail a snake and its trunk a hosepipe. But where in all this is the elephant? No matter how these blind people put together their findings, they cannot arrive at the correct answer. This is the eternal predicament of all atheist philosophers and thinkers. In their attempt to fathom the nature of reality in the universe, they have failed to be guided by true knowledge. As a result, their conclusions have been like those of a man, fumbling in the dark, and just hazarding wild guesses as to the nature of his surroundings, without ever truly understanding it.
To which "book of god" do you claim?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 10:40:22 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 7:15:57 AM, Passionate wrote:
Those who have tried to understand the Universe without recourse to the Book of God are just like those blind people who try to find out what an elephant is by touching different parts of its body. One will touch its leg, and think he has found a pillar. Another will feel its ear, and think it is a winnowing basket. Its back will be proclaimed a platform, its tail a snake and its trunk a hosepipe. But where in all this is the elephant? No matter how these blind people put together their findings, they cannot arrive at the correct answer. This is the eternal predicament of all atheist philosophers and thinkers. In their attempt to fathom the nature of reality in the universe, they have failed to be guided by true knowledge. As a result, their conclusions have been like those of a man, fumbling in the dark, and just hazarding wild guesses as to the nature of his surroundings, without ever truly understanding it.

Two responses:

First, who's the a$$hole that made us blind in the first place?

Second, it's false that we couldn't arrive at the correct answer (or a more correct answer). Almost everything we know (or think we know) is the result of the aggregation of data. We don't know about the life-cycle of stars because we've witnessed it in its entirety; our view of the Earth, necessarily, is compiled based upon the data collected from the individual POV's of satellites in orbit.

The entire field of science is built upon the premise that you can take the observations from one person, combine it with everyone else's, and get knowledge about the universe.

More science denialism.
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 10:50:33 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 7:15:57 AM, Passionate wrote:
Those who have tried to understand the Universe without recourse to the Book of God are just like those blind people who try to find out what an elephant is by touching different parts of its body. One will touch its leg, and think he has found a pillar. Another will feel its ear, and think it is a winnowing basket. Its back will be proclaimed a platform, its tail a snake and its trunk a hosepipe. But where in all this is the elephant? No matter how these blind people put together their findings, they cannot arrive at the correct answer. This is the eternal predicament of all atheist philosophers and thinkers. In their attempt to fathom the nature of reality in the universe, they have failed to be guided by true knowledge. As a result, their conclusions have been like those of a man, fumbling in the dark, and just hazarding wild guesses as to the nature of his surroundings, without ever truly understanding it.

The poem ends like this:

So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen

Thus, according to the poem, you are one of the disputants, railing on in the same ignorance as the others. So you really shouldn't be using this example. It embarrassingly fails to support you.
Noctan
Posts: 420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 11:57:13 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 7:15:57 AM, Passionate wrote:
Those who have tried to understand the Universe without recourse to the Book of God are just like those blind people who try to find out what an elephant is by touching different parts of its body. One will touch its leg, and think he has found a pillar. Another will feel its ear, and think it is a winnowing basket. Its back will be proclaimed a platform, its tail a snake and its trunk a hosepipe. But where in all this is the elephant? No matter how these blind people put together their findings, they cannot arrive at the correct answer. This is the eternal predicament of all atheist philosophers and thinkers. In their attempt to fathom the nature of reality in the universe, they have failed to be guided by true knowledge. As a result, their conclusions have been like those of a man, fumbling in the dark, and just hazarding wild guesses as to the nature of his surroundings, without ever truly understanding it.

Well, God can't be proven. That's the eternal predicament of Christians, Mormons, etc.
I can manage my anger if people can manage their stupidity.
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 12:11:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 7:15:57 AM, Passionate wrote:
Those who have tried to understand the Universe without recourse to the Book of God are just like those blind people who try to find out what an elephant is by touching different parts of its body. One will touch its leg, and think he has found a pillar. Another will feel its ear, and think it is a winnowing basket. Its back will be proclaimed a platform, its tail a snake and its trunk a hosepipe. But where in all this is the elephant? No matter how these blind people put together their findings, they cannot arrive at the correct answer. This is the eternal predicament of all atheist philosophers and thinkers. In their attempt to fathom the nature of reality in the universe, they have failed to be guided by true knowledge. As a result, their conclusions have been like those of a man, fumbling in the dark, and just hazarding wild guesses as to the nature of his surroundings, without ever truly understanding it.

"We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library, whose walls are covered to the ceiling with books in many different languages. The child knows that someone must have written those books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books, a mysterious order, which it does not comprehend but only dimly suspects."

R13; Albert Einstein
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 12:11:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 7:15:57 AM, Passionate wrote:
Those who have tried to understand the Universe without recourse to the Book of God are just like those blind people who try to find out what an elephant is by touching different parts of its body. One will touch its leg, and think he has found a pillar. Another will feel its ear, and think it is a winnowing basket. Its back will be proclaimed a platform, its tail a snake and its trunk a hosepipe. But where in all this is the elephant? No matter how these blind people put together their findings, they cannot arrive at the correct answer. This is the eternal predicament of all atheist philosophers and thinkers. In their attempt to fathom the nature of reality in the universe, they have failed to be guided by true knowledge. As a result, their conclusions have been like those of a man, fumbling in the dark, and just hazarding wild guesses as to the nature of his surroundings, without ever truly understanding it.

"We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library, whose walls are covered to the ceiling with books in many different languages. The child knows that someone must have written those books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books, a mysterious order, which it does not comprehend but only dimly suspects."

- Albert Einstein
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 1:00:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 7:15:57 AM, Passionate wrote:
Those who have tried to understand the Universe without recourse to the Book of God are just like those blind people who try to find out what an elephant is by touching different parts of its body.

Those who try to understand the universe by appealing to a God are just as blind as someone trying to explain lightning bolts by appealing to Zeus.

One will touch its leg, and think he has found a pillar. Another will feel its ear, and think it is a winnowing basket. Its back will be proclaimed a platform, its tail a snake and its trunk a hosepipe. But where in all this is the elephant? No matter how these blind people put together their findings, they cannot arrive at the correct answer.

No matter how much you think the lightning bolt has an intelligent origin, you are blind to the fact that it is just due to mechanical processes.

This is the eternal predicament of all atheist philosophers and thinkers.

What I have described is the problem with theistic thinkers. There is no evidence of a God, yet they deluded themselves into believing there is.

In their attempt to fathom the nature of reality in the universe, they have failed to be guided by true knowledge.

In your attempt to fathom reality and nature, you have failed to be guided by true knowledge, as you have been misguided by the God hypothesis.

As a result, their conclusions have been like those of a man, fumbling in the dark, and just hazarding wild guesses as to the nature of his surroundings, without ever truly understanding it.

As a result, your conclusion is like seeing a volcano and thinking an angry God did it, when it can all be explained scientifically. False knowledge is what theists hold dear.
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2013 2:01:34 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/31/2013 7:15:57 AM, Passionate wrote:
Those who have tried to understand the Universe without recourse to the Book of God are just like those blind people who try to find out what an elephant is by touching different parts of its body. One will touch its leg, and think he has found a pillar. Another will feel its ear, and think it is a winnowing basket. Its back will be proclaimed a platform, its tail a snake and its trunk a hosepipe. But where in all this is the elephant? No matter how these blind people put together their findings, they cannot arrive at the correct answer. This is the eternal predicament of all atheist philosophers and thinkers. In their attempt to fathom the nature of reality in the universe, they have failed to be guided by true knowledge. As a result, their conclusions have been like those of a man, fumbling in the dark, and just hazarding wild guesses as to the nature of his surroundings, without ever truly understanding it.

Because an ancient book of fantastical stories is so much more reliable than modern technology and science.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
Passionate
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2013 1:08:01 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
First of All Science is simply trying to understand how the objective world functions and not why it functions, it gives us partial knowledge of reality and also it does not attempt to find the absolute truth, For Example science is concerned with the biological aspect of man, it is not the aim of science to try to discover the secret of the strange phenomena commonly known as the mind and spirit. Although science has failed to give a satisfactory answer to the quest for truth, it is not to be disparaged, for this has never been its motivation. There is no denial that science has many plus points for betterment of human but has its minus point as well, it gave us machine but caused a new social problem of unemployment, gave us motorcars but it polluted the air making it difficult for us to inhale fresh air, Modern industries polluted the life giving water and so on.

However Science cant be legitimately blamed for not helping human to grasp the ultimate reality,for this was not something expected of it. Indeed the reality lies far beyond the boundaries of science.
Passionate
Noctan
Posts: 420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2013 1:16:43 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/1/2013 1:08:01 AM, Passionate wrote:
First of All Science is simply trying to understand how the objective world functions and not why it functions, it gives us partial knowledge of reality and also it does not attempt to find the absolute truth, For Example science is concerned with the biological aspect of man, it is not the aim of science to try to discover the secret of the strange phenomena commonly known as the mind and spirit. Although science has failed to give a satisfactory answer to the quest for truth, it is not to be disparaged, for this has never been its motivation. There is no denial that science has many plus points for betterment of human but has its minus point as well, it gave us machine but caused a new social problem of unemployment, gave us motorcars but it polluted the air making it difficult for us to inhale fresh air, Modern industries polluted the life giving water and so on.

However Science cant be legitimately blamed for not helping human to grasp the ultimate reality,for this was not something expected of it. Indeed the reality lies far beyond the boundaries of science.

Prove God. Again, what nobody can do.
I can manage my anger if people can manage their stupidity.
Passionate
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2013 1:44:49 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/1/2013 1:16:43 AM, Noctan wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:08:01 AM, Passionate wrote:
First of All Science is simply trying to understand how the objective world functions and not why it functions, it gives us partial knowledge of reality and also it does not attempt to find the absolute truth, For Example science is concerned with the biological aspect of man, it is not the aim of science to try to discover the secret of the strange phenomena commonly known as the mind and spirit. Although science has failed to give a satisfactory answer to the quest for truth, it is not to be disparaged, for this has never been its motivation. There is no denial that science has many plus points for betterment of human but has its minus point as well, it gave us machine but caused a new social problem of unemployment, gave us motorcars but it polluted the air making it difficult for us to inhale fresh air, Modern industries polluted the life giving water and so on.

However Science cant be legitimately blamed for not helping human to grasp the ultimate reality,for this was not something expected of it. Indeed the reality lies far beyond the boundaries of science.

Prove God. Again, what nobody can do.

Really, Then prove me the existence of things other than GOD
Passionate
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2013 1:46:01 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/1/2013 1:44:49 AM, Passionate wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:16:43 AM, Noctan wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:08:01 AM, Passionate wrote:
First of All Science is simply trying to understand how the objective world functions and not why it functions, it gives us partial knowledge of reality and also it does not attempt to find the absolute truth, For Example science is concerned with the biological aspect of man, it is not the aim of science to try to discover the secret of the strange phenomena commonly known as the mind and spirit. Although science has failed to give a satisfactory answer to the quest for truth, it is not to be disparaged, for this has never been its motivation. There is no denial that science has many plus points for betterment of human but has its minus point as well, it gave us machine but caused a new social problem of unemployment, gave us motorcars but it polluted the air making it difficult for us to inhale fresh air, Modern industries polluted the life giving water and so on.

However Science cant be legitimately blamed for not helping human to grasp the ultimate reality,for this was not something expected of it. Indeed the reality lies far beyond the boundaries of science.

Prove God. Again, what nobody can do.

Really, Then prove me the existence of things other than GOD

DDO exists. You interact with it, and we can test whether it exists through universal direct experience.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Noctan
Posts: 420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2013 1:49:16 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/1/2013 1:44:49 AM, Passionate wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:16:43 AM, Noctan wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:08:01 AM, Passionate wrote:
First of All Science is simply trying to understand how the objective world functions and not why it functions, it gives us partial knowledge of reality and also it does not attempt to find the absolute truth, For Example science is concerned with the biological aspect of man, it is not the aim of science to try to discover the secret of the strange phenomena commonly known as the mind and spirit. Although science has failed to give a satisfactory answer to the quest for truth, it is not to be disparaged, for this has never been its motivation. There is no denial that science has many plus points for betterment of human but has its minus point as well, it gave us machine but caused a new social problem of unemployment, gave us motorcars but it polluted the air making it difficult for us to inhale fresh air, Modern industries polluted the life giving water and so on.

However Science cant be legitimately blamed for not helping human to grasp the ultimate reality,for this was not something expected of it. Indeed the reality lies far beyond the boundaries of science.

Prove God. Again, what nobody can do.

Really, Then prove me the existence of things other than GOD

.........What???
I can manage my anger if people can manage their stupidity.
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2013 1:51:02 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/1/2013 1:49:16 AM, Noctan wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:44:49 AM, Passionate wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:16:43 AM, Noctan wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:08:01 AM, Passionate wrote:
First of All Science is simply trying to understand how the objective world functions and not why it functions, it gives us partial knowledge of reality and also it does not attempt to find the absolute truth, For Example science is concerned with the biological aspect of man, it is not the aim of science to try to discover the secret of the strange phenomena commonly known as the mind and spirit. Although science has failed to give a satisfactory answer to the quest for truth, it is not to be disparaged, for this has never been its motivation. There is no denial that science has many plus points for betterment of human but has its minus point as well, it gave us machine but caused a new social problem of unemployment, gave us motorcars but it polluted the air making it difficult for us to inhale fresh air, Modern industries polluted the life giving water and so on.

However Science cant be legitimately blamed for not helping human to grasp the ultimate reality,for this was not something expected of it. Indeed the reality lies far beyond the boundaries of science.

Prove God. Again, what nobody can do.

Really, Then prove me the existence of things other than GOD

.........What???

It's the tired but common attempt to try to say "There are things! Lots of things! Therefore God."

It's specious and foolish but it's common among the type of people who think that if htey just say things with enough vehemence, they must be true.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2013 1:51:18 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Did you know that when blind people see for the first time, they can't recognise any of the objects they can see. Even if they felt a cube just beforehand, they couldn't recognise it just by looking at it.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
Passionate
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2013 1:52:57 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/1/2013 1:46:01 AM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:44:49 AM, Passionate wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:16:43 AM, Noctan wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:08:01 AM, Passionate wrote:
First of All Science is simply trying to understand how the objective world functions and not why it functions, it gives us partial knowledge of reality and also it does not attempt to find the absolute truth, For Example science is concerned with the biological aspect of man, it is not the aim of science to try to discover the secret of the strange phenomena commonly known as the mind and spirit. Although science has failed to give a satisfactory answer to the quest for truth, it is not to be disparaged, for this has never been its motivation. There is no denial that science has many plus points for betterment of human but has its minus point as well, it gave us machine but caused a new social problem of unemployment, gave us motorcars but it polluted the air making it difficult for us to inhale fresh air, Modern industries polluted the life giving water and so on.

However Science cant be legitimately blamed for not helping human to grasp the ultimate reality,for this was not something expected of it. Indeed the reality lies far beyond the boundaries of science.

Prove God. Again, what nobody can do.

Really, Then prove me the existence of things other than GOD

DDO exists. You interact with it, and we can test whether it exists through universal direct experience.

So you only believe things which can be proven ???
Passionate
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2013 1:53:02 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/1/2013 1:44:49 AM, Passionate wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:16:43 AM, Noctan wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:08:01 AM, Passionate wrote:
First of All Science is simply trying to understand how the objective world functions and not why it functions, it gives us partial knowledge of reality and also it does not attempt to find the absolute truth, For Example science is concerned with the biological aspect of man, it is not the aim of science to try to discover the secret of the strange phenomena commonly known as the mind and spirit. Although science has failed to give a satisfactory answer to the quest for truth, it is not to be disparaged, for this has never been its motivation. There is no denial that science has many plus points for betterment of human but has its minus point as well, it gave us machine but caused a new social problem of unemployment, gave us motorcars but it polluted the air making it difficult for us to inhale fresh air, Modern industries polluted the life giving water and so on.

However Science cant be legitimately blamed for not helping human to grasp the ultimate reality,for this was not something expected of it. Indeed the reality lies far beyond the boundaries of science.

Prove God. Again, what nobody can do.

Really, Then prove me the existence of things other than GOD

If you don't believe in anything other than "GOD" then that's your problem. If you want to convince us that any gods exist, then you need to provide the evidence.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
Passionate
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2013 1:55:44 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/1/2013 1:53:02 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:44:49 AM, Passionate wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:16:43 AM, Noctan wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:08:01 AM, Passionate wrote:
First of All Science is simply trying to understand how the objective world functions and not why it functions, it gives us partial knowledge of reality and also it does not attempt to find the absolute truth, For Example science is concerned with the biological aspect of man, it is not the aim of science to try to discover the secret of the strange phenomena commonly known as the mind and spirit. Although science has failed to give a satisfactory answer to the quest for truth, it is not to be disparaged, for this has never been its motivation. There is no denial that science has many plus points for betterment of human but has its minus point as well, it gave us machine but caused a new social problem of unemployment, gave us motorcars but it polluted the air making it difficult for us to inhale fresh air, Modern industries polluted the life giving water and so on.

However Science cant be legitimately blamed for not helping human to grasp the ultimate reality,for this was not something expected of it. Indeed the reality lies far beyond the boundaries of science.

Prove God. Again, what nobody can do.

Really, Then prove me the existence of things other than GOD

If you don't believe in anything other than "GOD" then that's your problem. If you want to convince us that any gods exist, then you need to provide the evidence.

I never said i don't believe things other than GOD rather i said not each and everything can be proven, People generally believe that they are in a position to prove or disprove anything. But this is not the scientific position. According to modern science, you cannot prove or disprove anything; you can only arrive at a probability, rather than a certainty.
Passionate
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2013 1:56:00 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/1/2013 1:52:57 AM, Passionate wrote:

Really, Then prove me the existence of things other than GOD

DDO exists. You interact with it, and we can test whether it exists through universal direct experience.

So you only believe things which can be proven ???

Well, first, you're the one who asked for proof of "things other than god".

Second, as a general rule, yes. And so do you. You don't believe in, for example, pink fairies that flit around the world sprinkling fairy dust, because you have no reason to. As rational creatures, we generally believe in things only with a reason. A reason isn't necessarily a full-fledged "proof", but it's certainly along the same lines.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2013 1:58:12 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/1/2013 1:55:44 AM, Passionate wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:53:02 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:44:49 AM, Passionate wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:16:43 AM, Noctan wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:08:01 AM, Passionate wrote:
First of All Science is simply trying to understand how the objective world functions and not why it functions, it gives us partial knowledge of reality and also it does not attempt to find the absolute truth, For Example science is concerned with the biological aspect of man, it is not the aim of science to try to discover the secret of the strange phenomena commonly known as the mind and spirit. Although science has failed to give a satisfactory answer to the quest for truth, it is not to be disparaged, for this has never been its motivation. There is no denial that science has many plus points for betterment of human but has its minus point as well, it gave us machine but caused a new social problem of unemployment, gave us motorcars but it polluted the air making it difficult for us to inhale fresh air, Modern industries polluted the life giving water and so on.

However Science cant be legitimately blamed for not helping human to grasp the ultimate reality,for this was not something expected of it. Indeed the reality lies far beyond the boundaries of science.

Prove God. Again, what nobody can do.

Really, Then prove me the existence of things other than GOD

If you don't believe in anything other than "GOD" then that's your problem. If you want to convince us that any gods exist, then you need to provide the evidence.

I never said i don't believe things other than GOD

I never said you said that, or that you believe such a thing.

rather i said not each and everything can be proven, People generally believe that they are in a position to prove or disprove anything. But this is not the scientific position. According to modern science, you cannot prove or disprove anything; you can only arrive at a probability, rather than a certainty.

What about "prove" as in provide sufficient evidence to convince?
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2013 1:59:49 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/1/2013 1:56:00 AM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:52:57 AM, Passionate wrote:

Really, Then prove me the existence of things other than GOD

DDO exists. You interact with it, and we can test whether it exists through universal direct experience.

So you only believe things which can be proven ???

Well, first, you're the one who asked for proof of "things other than god".

Second, as a general rule, yes. And so do you. You don't believe in, for example, pink fairies that flit around the world sprinkling fairy dust, because you have no reason to. As rational creatures, we generally believe in things only with a reason. A reason isn't necessarily a full-fledged "proof", but it's certainly along the same lines.

I'm ctrl+c(infn) this so that whenever I press ctrl+v I automatically paste this. The amount of times we will all need to repeat this.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2013 2:01:40 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/1/2013 1:55:44 AM, Passionate wrote:

If you don't believe in anything other than "GOD" then that's your problem. If you want to convince us that any gods exist, then you need to provide the evidence.

I never said i don't believe things other than GOD rather i said not each and everything can be proven, People generally believe that they are in a position to prove or disprove anything.

If they're making a claim, they SHOULD believe they're in a position to prove that claim. Otherwise they're just making things up.

But this is not the scientific position. According to modern science, you cannot prove or disprove anything; you can only arrive at a probability, rather than a certainty.

Very true. No one has ever disproved solipsism. But trying to equate my belief in, say, the computer upon which I'm typing this, which can be trivially actually seen by anyone who wants to, which has demonstrable effects on my environment, with a belief for which you have no evidence whatsoever, is laughable. You do recognize that, I hope?

What you're engaging in is still an argument from ignorance. "We can't know with certainty, therefore God" is not a valid argument. As the one making the claim, it is up to YOU to justify it, not up to everyone else to prove it can't possibly be true.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Passionate
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2013 2:08:27 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/1/2013 2:01:40 AM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:55:44 AM, Passionate wrote:

If you don't believe in anything other than "GOD" then that's your problem. If you want to convince us that any gods exist, then you need to provide the evidence.

I never said i don't believe things other than GOD rather i said not each and everything can be proven, People generally believe that they are in a position to prove or disprove anything.

If they're making a claim, they SHOULD believe they're in a position to prove that claim. Otherwise they're just making things up.

But this is not the scientific position. According to modern science, you cannot prove or disprove anything; you can only arrive at a probability, rather than a certainty.

Very true. No one has ever disproved solipsism. But trying to equate my belief in, say, the computer upon which I'm typing this, which can be trivially actually seen by anyone who wants to, which has demonstrable effects on my environment, with a belief for which you have no evidence whatsoever, is laughable. You do recognize that, I hope?

What you're engaging in is still an argument from ignorance. "We can't know with certainty, therefore God" is not a valid argument. As the one making the claim, it is up to YOU to justify it, not up to everyone else to prove it can't possibly be true.

When a human being exists, why cannot God exist? When air and water, trees and stones, moon and stars exist, why should the existence of their Creator be doubted? The truth is that the existence of creation is the proof of the act of creation. And the presence of man is proof of the fact that there exists such a Creator as can see and hear, think and bring things into existence.God, of course, is not visible to the naked eye. But there is no doubt about it that many of the things existing in this world cannot be seen either. Then why is it necessary to see God, physically, in order to believe in Him? The stars twinkle in the sky. The layman thinks that he is looking at the stars, whereas, strictly speaking, from the scientific point of view, this is not true. When we are looking at the stars, we are not actually looking directly at them, but at the light which emanated from them millions of years ago, and which has only now become visible to our eyes.

The same is true of many things in this world. All those things which man "sees" in this world are viewed by him indirectly. There is little that man can see directly, because of his present limitations. When all the things of this world are accepted on the basis of indirect evidence, why is it that the presence of God should not be accepted on the same basis?

The fact is that God is as much a proven fact as any other phenomenon in this world. Everything in this world is proven on the basis of indirect evidence. Everything in this world is known by its effect. Precisely of the same nature is the existence of God. It is true, of course, that God is not to be seen directly with our eyes. But God is certainly visible through His signs. And, undoubtedly, this is enough scientific proof of God"s existence.
Passionate
Noctan
Posts: 420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2013 2:16:01 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/1/2013 1:52:57 AM, Passionate wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:46:01 AM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:44:49 AM, Passionate wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:16:43 AM, Noctan wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:08:01 AM, Passionate wrote:
First of All Science is simply trying to understand how the objective world functions and not why it functions, it gives us partial knowledge of reality and also it does not attempt to find the absolute truth, For Example science is concerned with the biological aspect of man, it is not the aim of science to try to discover the secret of the strange phenomena commonly known as the mind and spirit. Although science has failed to give a satisfactory answer to the quest for truth, it is not to be disparaged, for this has never been its motivation. There is no denial that science has many plus points for betterment of human but has its minus point as well, it gave us machine but caused a new social problem of unemployment, gave us motorcars but it polluted the air making it difficult for us to inhale fresh air, Modern industries polluted the life giving water and so on.

However Science cant be legitimately blamed for not helping human to grasp the ultimate reality,for this was not something expected of it. Indeed the reality lies far beyond the boundaries of science.

Prove God. Again, what nobody can do.

Really, Then prove me the existence of things other than GOD

DDO exists. You interact with it, and we can test whether it exists through universal direct experience.

So you only believe things which can be proven ???

Do you believe in pixies? No. Why? Because they can't be proven and have no evidence to support their existence. Just like God.
I can manage my anger if people can manage their stupidity.
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2013 2:18:14 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
When a human being exists, why cannot God exist?

Sorry, not how this works. We don't assume all possible (even if contradictory) concepts exist until someone can prove they don't. The burden is on the one making the assertion. As has been told to you before.

When air and water, trees and stones, moon and stars exist, why should the existence of their Creator be doubted?

Because that's a foolish logical fallacy called "begging the question", when you assume your conclusion in your premises. "Things exist. Things must be created. Therefore there is a creator of things" does nothing to prove the existence of a deity.

The truth is that the existence of creation is the proof of the act of creation.

No it isn't. At all.

And the presence of man is proof of the fact that there exists such a Creator as can see and hear, think and bring things into existence.

No, it isn't. At all.

God, of course, is not visible to the naked eye. But there is no doubt about it that many of the things existing in this world cannot be seen either. Then why is it necessary to see God, physically, in order to believe in Him?

Man, you couldn't even beat up a straw man? First off, no one said it was necessary to physically see God. Sot his argument is stupid and dishonest. Second off, things which exist can be seen in some fasion, whether by their effect on the environment in provable demonstrable ways.

The same is true of many things in this world. All those things which man "sees" in this world are viewed by him indirectly. There is little that man can see directly, because of his present limitations. When all the things of this world are accepted on the basis of indirect evidence, why is it that the presence of God should not be accepted on the same basis?

Because your "evidence" for God isn't actual evidence of anything, while star light is actual evidence for stars?

The fact is that God is as much a proven fact as any other phenomenon in this world.

Not in any way, shape or form. I suspect you're just a Poe, at this point.

Everything in this world is proven on the basis of indirect evidence. Everything in this world is known by its effect. Precisely of the same nature is the existence of God. It is true, of course, that God is not to be seen directly with our eyes. But God is certainly visible through His signs.

Really? Which god? What attributes does he have? How do you know he exists, and that the universe isn't simply the deterministic effect of initial conditions? What indirect evidence do you actually have, besides the laughable "evidence" of "Things exist therefore God"?

And, undoubtedly, this is enough scientific proof of God"s existence.

Perhaps you should take some sort of science course. Because no, it is not at all.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Noctan
Posts: 420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2013 2:19:19 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/1/2013 1:55:44 AM, Passionate wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:53:02 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:44:49 AM, Passionate wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:16:43 AM, Noctan wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:08:01 AM, Passionate wrote:
First of All Science is simply trying to understand how the objective world functions and not why it functions, it gives us partial knowledge of reality and also it does not attempt to find the absolute truth, For Example science is concerned with the biological aspect of man, it is not the aim of science to try to discover the secret of the strange phenomena commonly known as the mind and spirit. Although science has failed to give a satisfactory answer to the quest for truth, it is not to be disparaged, for this has never been its motivation. There is no denial that science has many plus points for betterment of human but has its minus point as well, it gave us machine but caused a new social problem of unemployment, gave us motorcars but it polluted the air making it difficult for us to inhale fresh air, Modern industries polluted the life giving water and so on.

However Science cant be legitimately blamed for not helping human to grasp the ultimate reality,for this was not something expected of it. Indeed the reality lies far beyond the boundaries of science.

Prove God. Again, what nobody can do.

Really, Then prove me the existence of things other than GOD

If you don't believe in anything other than "GOD" then that's your problem. If you want to convince us that any gods exist, then you need to provide the evidence.

I never said i don't believe things other than GOD rather i said not each and everything can be proven, People generally believe that they are in a position to prove or disprove anything. But this is not the scientific position. According to modern science, you cannot prove or disprove anything; you can only arrive at a probability, rather than a certainty.

You're correct. Not eveything can be proven. But God has absolutely no evidence to support its existence.
I can manage my anger if people can manage their stupidity.
Passionate
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/1/2013 2:25:14 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/1/2013 2:19:19 AM, Noctan wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:55:44 AM, Passionate wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:53:02 AM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:44:49 AM, Passionate wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:16:43 AM, Noctan wrote:
At 8/1/2013 1:08:01 AM, Passionate wrote:
First of All Science is simply trying to understand how the objective world functions and not why it functions, it gives us partial knowledge of reality and also it does not attempt to find the absolute truth, For Example science is concerned with the biological aspect of man, it is not the aim of science to try to discover the secret of the strange phenomena commonly known as the mind and spirit. Although science has failed to give a satisfactory answer to the quest for truth, it is not to be disparaged, for this has never been its motivation. There is no denial that science has many plus points for betterment of human but has its minus point as well, it gave us machine but caused a new social problem of unemployment, gave us motorcars but it polluted the air making it difficult for us to inhale fresh air, Modern industries polluted the life giving water and so on.

However Science cant be legitimately blamed for not helping human to grasp the ultimate reality,for this was not something expected of it. Indeed the reality lies far beyond the boundaries of science.

Prove God. Again, what nobody can do.

Really, Then prove me the existence of things other than GOD

If you don't believe in anything other than "GOD" then that's your problem. If you want to convince us that any gods exist, then you need to provide the evidence.

I never said i don't believe things other than GOD rather i said not each and everything can be proven, People generally believe that they are in a position to prove or disprove anything. But this is not the scientific position. According to modern science, you cannot prove or disprove anything; you can only arrive at a probability, rather than a certainty.

You're correct. Not eveything can be proven. But God has absolutely no evidence to support its existence.

The Big Bang explosion resulted in a universe that is highly constructive and meaningful, in every sense of these words. This miraculous phenomenon is enough to make us believe that the Big Bang explosion was certainly pre-planned. And when it is proved that it was pre-planned, it is automatically proved that behind this pre-planning there was a planner, indeed a Super Planner. And it is this Super Planner who is God Almighty.

When we reflect deeply about our world, we find that all over the universe there are clear signs of planning, design and intelligent control. These signs lead us to believe that there is a Creator of creatures, there is a Designer of designs, and there is a Mover of all movements " Almighty God.
Passionate