Total Posts:7|Showing Posts:1-7
Jump to topic:

Just refuting a few common arguments

gr33k_fr33k5
Posts: 321
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 5:40:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
1. The reference to a god is based upon a 100% human devised concept.

2. The legitimate evidence ANY literal Supernatural being was involved in ANY acclaimed ' holy-text ' remains a constant zero!

3. Adam & Eve are 100% human fabrication in the bible Story book

-Composer

the first can be claimed of anything. Time itself is a human devised concept and yet it is used in human experiments all the time.

the second is simply a subjective idea. . . If you stand on the side of the believer "evidence" is the world's existence. . .

The third has no surrounding evidence. . . A claim seemingly pulled from thin air that would never convince someone of your idea.

CHOW
I am free, free indeed!

ignorance is bliss
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 6:11:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/20/2013 5:40:25 PM, gr33k_fr33k5 wrote:
1. The reference to a god is based upon a 100% human devised concept.

2. The legitimate evidence ANY literal Supernatural being was involved in ANY acclaimed ' holy-text ' remains a constant zero!

3. Adam & Eve are 100% human fabrication in the bible Story book

-Composer

the first can be claimed of anything. Time itself is a human devised concept and yet it is used in human experiments all the time.

Time, Electricity, Gravity, magnetism and every "human concept" are measurable and definable phenomona in the natural world. While the definitions and descriptions are definitively human the measurable effects of these phenomona which these human concepts reflect are, well, measurable. You can tell this by the way that you wouldn't touch a live power cable transmitting 250,000 volts of the human concept of electricity without first protecting yourself by using methods described using the predictive utility of that concept.

The same is no true of God, which is not measurable and has no predictable utility.

the second is simply a subjective idea. . . If you stand on the side of the believer "evidence" is the world's existence. . .

The existance of the world is "evidence" for God, Pantheism, The Flying Spaghetti Monster, a Hypercosmic Chuck Norris, and any other pan universal personal or non personal entity which is what makes it illegitimate evidence; as the requirement of God to explain it is not a requirement, with many other explanations either explaining the existance of the world more appropriately, more predictively, or without inferring from such existance properties, features or temperment of such a God that cannot be inferred from such evidence.


The third has no surrounding evidence. . . A claim seemingly pulled from thin air that would never convince someone of your idea.

The concept of Adam and Eve being made is not supported by any evidence: except Biology, Paleontology, Genetic analysis of both the main genome and mitochondrial Genome which show no evidence whatsoever of any form of population bottle neck.

Given this, and given that the story itself (I might add combined with many other traditions, myths and stories of the bible) show stark resemblences to creation myths outside and predating both Christianity and the Judaic Creation myths; specifically from Babylonian evidence dating to the 22nd or 23rd century BC; the statement that there is "no evidence" is not actually true.

Moreover, while I would not agree with the O/P that it is "100% a fabrication"; as you cannot prove any such thing absolutely, the balance of all evidence from history, biology, paleontology, archaeology, and genetics makes it highly, highly, highly unlikely to the most significant degree that it may as well be 100% for all intents and purposes.
themohawkninja
Posts: 816
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 6:18:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/20/2013 5:40:25 PM, gr33k_fr33k5 wrote:
1. The reference to a god is based upon a 100% human devised concept.

2. The legitimate evidence ANY literal Supernatural being was involved in ANY acclaimed ' holy-text ' remains a constant zero!

3. Adam & Eve are 100% human fabrication in the bible Story

-Composer

the first can be claimed of anything. Time itself is a human devised concept and yet it is used in human experiments all the time.

Time isn't necessarily a human derived concept, since we do know for a fact that time varies as a function of speed (normally referred to as "relativistic effects").

It also has a bit of backing, in that religions were created in order to explain natural phenomena before the advent of science.

the second is simply a subjective idea. . . If you stand on the side of the believer "evidence" is the world's existence. . .

This is only subjective by the specific way you worded it. In a real world scenario, what is "evidence" would be fleshed out.

The third has no surrounding evidence. . . A claim seemingly pulled from thin air that would never convince someone of your idea.

Seeing as the entirety of all holy texts were written by people, it's entirely possible that they were made up.

How could you record events of the first two human beings if you aren't one of those two human beings?

CHOW
"Morals are simply a limit to man's potential."~Myself

Political correctness is like saying you can't have a steak, because a baby can't eat one ~Unknown
gr33k_fr33k5
Posts: 321
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 6:27:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/20/2013 6:11:26 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 12/20/2013 5:40:25 PM, gr33k_fr33k5 wrote:
1. The reference to a god is based upon a 100% human devised concept.

2. The legitimate evidence ANY literal Supernatural being was involved in ANY acclaimed ' holy-text ' remains a constant zero!

3. Adam & Eve are 100% human fabrication in the bible Story book

-Composer

the first can be claimed of anything. Time itself is a human devised concept and yet it is used in human experiments all the time.

Time, Electricity, Gravity, magnetism and every "human concept" are measurable and definable phenomona in the natural world. While the definitions and descriptions are definitively human the measurable effects of these phenomona which these human concepts reflect are, well, measurable. You can tell this by the way that you wouldn't touch a live power cable transmitting 250,000 volts of the human concept of electricity without first protecting yourself by using methods described using the predictive utility of that concept.

The same is no true of God, which is not measurable and has no predictable utility.

Then the problem is not that God is a human devised concept. . . seeing as all those things you listed are simply imaginary ideas and words used to describe an individual's version of reality.

the second is simply a subjective idea. . . If you stand on the side of the believer "evidence" is the world's existence. . .

The existance of the world is "evidence" for God, Pantheism, The Flying Spaghetti Monster, a Hypercosmic Chuck Norris, and any other pan universal personal or non personal entity which is what makes it illegitimate evidence; as the requirement of God to explain it is not a requirement, with many other explanations either explaining the existance of the world more appropriately, more predictively, or without inferring from such existance properties, features or temperment of such a God that cannot be inferred from such evidence.

The title given to a entity by human's gains it's meaning from the society in which it is given. For example the title of president was originally given as the lowliest of possible titles for our leader as opposed to king and lord, yet, over time it has had meaning and power given to it.

That being said, this is the place that science and religion rely on different forms of proof. One runs on faulty assumptions that appear to be true in the moment (science). The other runs on emotions and feelings. To argue that one should be followed over the other is rather silly.


The third has no surrounding evidence. . . A claim seemingly pulled from thin air that would never convince someone of your idea.

The concept of Adam and Eve being made is not supported by any evidence: except Biology, Paleontology, Genetic analysis of both the main genome and mitochondrial Genome which show no evidence whatsoever of any form of population bottle neck.

Given this, and given that the story itself (I might add combined with many other traditions, myths and stories of the bible) show stark resemblences to creation myths outside and predating both Christianity and the Judaic Creation myths; specifically from Babylonian evidence dating to the 22nd or 23rd century BC; the statement that there is "no evidence" is not actually true.

Moreover, while I would not agree with the O/P that it is "100% a fabrication"; as you cannot prove any such thing absolutely, the balance of all evidence from history, biology, paleontology, archaeology, and genetics makes it highly, highly, highly unlikely to the most significant degree that it may as well be 100% for all intents and purposes.

I agree, my comment was simply based off of the ridiculous way that the statement was provided. Stating something as fact without any evidence provided is always a good way to get an pc-pc asswhoopin
I am free, free indeed!

ignorance is bliss
gr33k_fr33k5
Posts: 321
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 6:30:23 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Well time is necessary for almost all human to human interaction. However, it was literally invented by humans as the most basic way of explaining changes in the world around us. Just as the concept of God was invented to explain how humans came about.
I am free, free indeed!

ignorance is bliss
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 6:40:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/20/2013 6:27:49 PM, gr33k_fr33k5 wrote:
At 12/20/2013 6:11:26 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 12/20/2013 5:40:25 PM, gr33k_fr33k5 wrote:
1. The reference to a god is based upon a 100% human devised concept.

2. The legitimate evidence ANY literal Supernatural being was involved in ANY acclaimed ' holy-text ' remains a constant zero!

3. Adam & Eve are 100% human fabrication in the bible Story book

-Composer

the first can be claimed of anything. Time itself is a human devised concept and yet it is used in human experiments all the time.

Time, Electricity, Gravity, magnetism and every "human concept" are measurable and definable phenomona in the natural world. While the definitions and descriptions are definitively human the measurable effects of these phenomona which these human concepts reflect are, well, measurable. You can tell this by the way that you wouldn't touch a live power cable transmitting 250,000 volts of the human concept of electricity without first protecting yourself by using methods described using the predictive utility of that concept.

The same is no true of God, which is not measurable and has no predictable utility.

Then the problem is not that God is a human devised concept. . . seeing as all those things you listed are simply imaginary ideas and words used to describe an individual's version of reality.

These are words are terminology used to represent real and physical objective phenomona to describe EVERYONES reality.

An electric shock is an electric shock to every single person on the planet; it is objective. It is neither imaginary, nor subjective.

The problem is that God is not testable, it is not objectively real in the same way that electricity is, it is subjective (due to how many different people beleive in different Gods) and provides no predictive utility: My use of electricity tells me that if I do not touch the ground when I touch a high voltage cable, I will not die; which is testable, and predictive. There is no such claim that "God", provides that meets the same burden of testable, predictive utility.


the second is simply a subjective idea. . . If you stand on the side of the believer "evidence" is the world's existence. . .

The existance of the world is "evidence" for God, Pantheism, The Flying Spaghetti Monster, a Hypercosmic Chuck Norris, and any other pan universal personal or non personal entity which is what makes it illegitimate evidence; as the requirement of God to explain it is not a requirement, with many other explanations either explaining the existance of the world more appropriately, more predictively, or without inferring from such existance properties, features or temperment of such a God that cannot be inferred from such evidence.

The title given to a entity by human's gains it's meaning from the society in which it is given. For example the title of president was originally given as the lowliest of possible titles for our leader as opposed to king and lord, yet, over time it has had meaning and power given to it.

That being said, this is the place that science and religion rely on different forms of proof. One runs on faulty assumptions that appear to be true in the moment (science). The other runs on emotions and feelings. To argue that one should be followed over the other is rather silly.

Considering that no invocation of God has ever led to anything beneficial being discovered, no meaningful or useful way of making peoples lifes meaningful better in any measurable objective way; where as science has demonstratably built our entire civilization to the point that while Jesus fed the 5000 and cured a few lepers, science has eradicated Smallpox, provided cures by innumerable diseases, and provides mechanisms and methods that current feed 40% of the worlds population. In many cases Religion has in fact stiffled or supressed such enquiry.

The case in point, if you had a life threatening disease, condition, or illness your first stop would be a hospital, where the combined sum of scientific biological and pharmaceutical enquirey has developed a series of ways of reducing or removing problems with the human body in a lot of (but by no means all) situations you would likely make a full recovery. Prior to this knowledge, in an age where your own mechanism of curing your illness was to pray; you would most likely die.

To argue that a system that demonstrably works in making the lifes of the entire world better should NOT be followed over a system that doesn't provide any objective, meaningful results is not just silly; it defies credulity. As I tend to say quite often: Science Works. Religion doesn't.



The third has no surrounding evidence. . . A claim seemingly pulled from thin air that would never convince someone of your idea.

The concept of Adam and Eve being made is not supported by any evidence: except Biology, Paleontology, Genetic analysis of both the main genome and mitochondrial Genome which show no evidence whatsoever of any form of population bottle neck.

Given this, and given that the story itself (I might add combined with many other traditions, myths and stories of the bible) show stark resemblences to creation myths outside and predating both Christianity and the Judaic Creation myths; specifically from Babylonian evidence dating to the 22nd or 23rd century BC; the statement that there is "no evidence" is not actually true.

Moreover, while I would not agree with the O/P that it is "100% a fabrication"; as you cannot prove any such thing absolutely, the balance of all evidence from history, biology, paleontology, archaeology, and genetics makes it highly, highly, highly unlikely to the most significant degree that it may as well be 100% for all intents and purposes.

I agree, my comment was simply based off of the ridiculous way that the statement was provided. Stating something as fact without any evidence provided is always a good way to get an pc-pc asswhoopin

Well that's no fun :)
Composer
Posts: 5,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 7:07:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Every single one claiming to be a genuine believer are LIARS, DECEIVERS & according to their own propaganda, also absolute FRAUDS!

We know this simply by the fact that these clowns run to Human Doctors & Hospitals in direct defiance of the Story book god(s) they ' claim to believe ' speaks absolute Truth!

e.g. Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; . . . . (Luke 17:33) KJV bible Story book

Yet we find every so called believer; rushing themselves & Or their family & friends to disobediently seek human intervention to prolong their fraudulent mortal existence? LMAO!

Some of these frauds are even employed in the Health Industry itself, making filthy $Mammon whilst they disobey and spit in the face of their preferred Story book god(s)

The Reality remain a constant, that the next genuine believer to step forward Outside of Story book Land, will be the very First in man's entire History!

QED