Total Posts:166|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Is there an evidence for the existence of God

Juris
Posts: 109
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2014 2:45:03 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
If you say any of the following:
1. Universe
2. Humans (life)
3. Bible
4. Faith

...Just explain how it becomes an evidence.

..the problem with theists is that they give any of those above-mentioned things as evidence but they cannot really explain how.

..Example.

Theist: the universe (or humans) is the evidence that God exists.
Atheist: how?
Theist: look at the universe it is so perfect and science cannot still find a solution.

_____WTF.. why would you automatically attribute the origin of the universe to GOD when science cannot explain... CAN you explain that it was GOD?

Life maybe amazing and perfect (wow, really? LOL) but it does not prove GOd..
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,954
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2014 2:20:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/20/2014 2:45:03 AM, Juris wrote:
If you say any of the following:
1. Universe
2. Humans (life)
3. Bible
4. Faith

...Just explain how it becomes an evidence.

..the problem with theists is that they give any of those above-mentioned things as evidence but they cannot really explain how.

..Example.

Theist: the universe (or humans) is the evidence that God exists.
Atheist: how?
Theist: look at the universe it is so perfect and science cannot still find a solution.

_____WTF.. why would you automatically attribute the origin of the universe to GOD when science cannot explain... CAN you explain that it was GOD?

Life maybe amazing and perfect (wow, really? LOL) but it does not prove GOd..

Universe: The cause of the Big Bang was necessarily spaceless, timeless, and immaterial. There is no reason to believe that a cause can be the sufficient of itself. Therefore the cause is transcendent - and personal - in order to have a causal effect.

Life - all of life depends on DNA. DNA contains the necessary information to sustain and propagate life. The information contained within DNA is like a super computer code. Bill Gates is quoted as saying "DNA is like computer code but far, far more advanced than anything we've ever created."

The last two points have no scientific basis.
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2014 2:31:14 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/20/2014 2:45:03 AM, Juris wrote:
If you say any of the following:
1. Universe
2. Humans (life)
3. Bible
4. Faith

...Just explain how it becomes an evidence.

..the problem with theists is that they give any of those above-mentioned things as evidence but they cannot really explain how.

..Example.

Theist: the universe (or humans) is the evidence that God exists.
Atheist: how?
Theist: look at the universe it is so perfect and science cannot still find a solution.

_____WTF.. why would you automatically attribute the origin of the universe to GOD when science cannot explain... CAN you explain that it was GOD?

Life maybe amazing and perfect (wow, really? LOL) but it does not prove GOd..

There is no evidence for the existence of an invisible supernatural man named God just as there is no evidence of the existence of an invisible powerful woman named Mother Nature.

These terms, names, labels are personifications of what does exist. The personified titles refer to all you see around you.

Saying nature is evidence of Mother Nature does not mean a supernatural woman exists.
Saying the universe is evidence of God does not mean a supernatural man exists.
It means the word God is just a characterization of the universe and life in general, the same as Mother nature is just a characterization of nature.
The invisible character does not exist. The reality which the character represents, does exist.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2014 5:18:14 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/20/2014 2:31:14 PM, Skyangel wrote:

Saying nature is evidence of Mother Nature does not mean a supernatural woman exists.
Saying the universe is evidence of God does not mean a supernatural man exists.
It means the word God is just a characterization of the universe and life in general, the same as Mother nature is just a characterization of nature.
The invisible character does not exist. The reality which the character represents, does exist.

That might be true for those who want to believe in such things. Some consider the character of God to be the embodiment of all that is evil and wrong with the world and mankind, that God sucks the life out of people turning them into programmed automatons. The universe, life and nature is anything and everything that is not God.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2014 5:42:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/20/2014 5:18:14 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 12/20/2014 2:31:14 PM, Skyangel wrote:

Saying nature is evidence of Mother Nature does not mean a supernatural woman exists.
Saying the universe is evidence of God does not mean a supernatural man exists.
It means the word God is just a characterization of the universe and life in general, the same as Mother nature is just a characterization of nature.
The invisible character does not exist. The reality which the character represents, does exist.

That might be true for those who want to believe in such things. Some consider the character of God to be the embodiment of all that is evil and wrong with the world and mankind, that God sucks the life out of people turning them into programmed automatons. The universe, life and nature is anything and everything that is not God.

The fact is that writers and story tellers have been personifying various aspects of life since humans could communicate with each other.
Obviously some perceive God as the embodiment of evil and that perception is perfectly understandable to me.
Life is made up of all opposites which include good and evil. Obviously some like to concentrate on the evil more than the good and vice versa. However, just because life is filled with evil, does that mean you hate life or believe it does not exist?
Do you still accept life as it is in spite of all the opposites within it?
Those that hate it enough and want no part of it tend to commit suicide to solve their own problems. The rest try to make the most of it and live it in the best way they can.

Religion is what turns people into programmed animations who act and think according to how their religions demand they act and think. They tend to lose all ability to think for themselves because they are told to "Just believe" and everything will eventually be a "bed of roses". Which in a way is true if you see the grave as a "bed of roses" where all rest in peace for all eternity.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2014 5:51:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/20/2014 5:42:23 PM, Skyangel wrote:

Life is made up of all opposites which include good and evil. Obviously some like to concentrate on the evil more than the good and vice versa. However, just because life is filled with evil, does that mean you hate life or believe it does not exist?

I don't think life is full of evil. People are naturally good and altruistic, it is religions that teach otherwise and cause those good, altruistic people to do bad things.

Do you still accept life as it is in spite of all the opposites within it?

There are plenty of things that don't have opposites, so I don't really see the point of your question.

Those that hate it enough and want no part of it tend to commit suicide to solve their own problems. The rest try to make the most of it and live it in the best way they can.

Religion is what turns people into programmed animations who act and think according to how their religions demand they act and think. They tend to lose all ability to think for themselves because they are told to "Just believe" and everything will eventually be a "bed of roses". Which in a way is true if you see the grave as a "bed of roses" where all rest in peace for all eternity.

Exactly, religions glorify death and how great death is over life. Even though, their gods supposedly offer them life to live, they can't wait to die.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2014 6:08:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/20/2014 2:20:24 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 12/20/2014 2:45:03 AM, Juris wrote:
If you say any of the following:
1. Universe
2. Humans (life)
3. Bible
4. Faith

...Just explain how it becomes an evidence.

..the problem with theists is that they give any of those above-mentioned things as evidence but they cannot really explain how.

..Example.

Theist: the universe (or humans) is the evidence that God exists.
Atheist: how?
Theist: look at the universe it is so perfect and science cannot still find a solution.

_____WTF.. why would you automatically attribute the origin of the universe to GOD when science cannot explain... CAN you explain that it was GOD?

Life maybe amazing and perfect (wow, really? LOL) but it does not prove GOd..

Universe: The cause of the Big Bang was necessarily spaceless, timeless, and immaterial.
That's a purely false premise and you've been challenged on it dozens of times. How many times do you have to lose this same debate before you realize that pedaling a lie isn't productive? There is no reason to assume that the events leading to big-bang were anything but natural and within the form of time which existed prior to big-bang. You've been refuted by Hawking, refuted by numerous people here and refuted by me.

There is no reason to believe that a cause can be the sufficient of itself. Therefore the cause is transcendent - and personal - in order to have a causal effect.
When a rain causes soil to turn into a muddy sludge, leading to a rock falling from the edge of a cliff, which in that chain of causes was transcendent, and in what way was it transcendent. And transcendent of what?

Life - all of life depends on DNA. DNA contains the necessary information to sustain and propagate life. The information contained within DNA is like a super computer code. Bill Gates is quoted as saying "DNA is like computer code but far, far more advanced than anything we've ever created."
Is a virus alive? It doesn't have any DNA. It utilizes RNA which is deemed to be the likely precursor to DNA in abiogenesis. Prior to that is TNA and each subsequent form of genetic code is more complex than its predecessor. Did your transcendent cause keep redesigning the storage system for genetic structure? Are your red blood cells alive? They live for about 120-days on average. Do they contain DNA? No, they do not.

The last two points have no scientific basis.
None of this continuous diatribe you trot out in a new thread every week or two, has any valid scientific basis.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2014 6:19:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/20/2014 5:51:20 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 12/20/2014 5:42:23 PM, Skyangel wrote:

Life is made up of all opposites which include good and evil. Obviously some like to concentrate on the evil more than the good and vice versa. However, just because life is filled with evil, does that mean you hate life or believe it does not exist?

I don't think life is full of evil. People are naturally good and altruistic, it is religions that teach otherwise and cause those good, altruistic people to do bad things.

OK, life is half full of evil not literally full of evil.
We all like to think all people are inherently good but if they are, how do we end up with child abusers, murderers and terrorists etc? Not all terrorists , murderers and child abusers are religious people. Only a very biased fool would believe they are. You must admit many bad things happen in this world and bad people exist.
Religion is obviously the cause of much debate and dissention in the world but I think division and disagreement would still exist without religion because I know many unbelievers who still argue about all kinds of ridiculous things like what political team is best and what football team is best. Humans are just naturally argumentative creatures. It keeps us amused.

Do you still accept life as it is in spite of all the opposites within it?

There are plenty of things that don't have opposites, so I don't really see the point of your question.

I am referring mainly to the good and evil which obviously exist in the world.
Do you accept life in spite of the good and evil within it?

Those that hate it enough and want no part of it tend to commit suicide to solve their own problems. The rest try to make the most of it and live it in the best way they can.

Religion is what turns people into programmed animations who act and think according to how their religions demand they act and think. They tend to lose all ability to think for themselves because they are told to "Just believe" and everything will eventually be a "bed of roses". Which in a way is true if you see the grave as a "bed of roses" where all rest in peace for all eternity.

Exactly, religions glorify death and how great death is over life. Even though, their gods supposedly offer them life to live, they can't wait to die.

Well isn't it better to look forward to death than to fear it?

What would life be like if people lived in fear of dying every day of their lives?

The concept of death being like falling asleep takes away all fear of death because none of us are afraid of falling asleep. We do it daily and wake up daily. If we never woke up it would obviously be like sleeping for ever.
That would only be scary if you end up in an eternal nightmare due to having eaten too much spaghetti the day before.
The flying spaghetti monster might haunt you for all eternity.
Rant
Posts: 1,674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2014 6:58:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
The Valley of Dry Bones

37 The hand of the Lord was on me, and he brought me out by the Spirit of the Lord and set me in the middle of a valley; it was full of bones. 2 He led me back and forth among them, and I saw a great many bones on the floor of the valley, bones that were very dry. 3 He asked me, "Son of man, can these bones live?"

I said, "Sovereign Lord, you alone know."

4 Then he said to me, "Prophesy to these bones and say to them, "Dry bones, hear the word of the Lord! 5 This is what the Sovereign Lord says to these bones: I will make breath[a] enter you, and you will come to life. 6 I will attach tendons to you and make flesh come upon you and cover you with skin; I will put breath in you, and you will come to life. Then you will know that I am the Lord.""

7 So I prophesied as I was commanded. And as I was prophesying, there was a noise, a rattling sound, and the bones came together, bone to bone. 8 I looked, and tendons and flesh appeared on them and skin covered them, but there was no breath in them.

9 Then he said to me, "Prophesy to the breath; prophesy, son of man, and say to it, "This is what the Sovereign Lord says: Come, breath, from the four winds and breathe into these slain, that they may live."" 10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and breath entered them; they came to life and stood up on their feet"a vast army.

11 Then he said to me: "Son of man, these bones are the people of Israel. They say, "Our bones are dried up and our hope is gone; we are cut off." 12 Therefore prophesy and say to them: "This is what the Sovereign Lord says: My people, I am going to open your graves and bring you up from them; I will bring you back to the land of Israel. 13 Then you, my people, will know that I am the Lord, when I open your graves and bring you up from them. 14 I will put my Spirit in you and you will live, and I will settle you in your own land. Then you will know that I the Lord have spoken, and I have done it, declares the Lord.""
SebUK
Posts: 850
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2014 7:10:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/20/2014 2:20:24 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 12/20/2014 2:45:03 AM, Juris wrote:
If you say any of the following:
1. Universe
2. Humans (life)
3. Bible
4. Faith

...Just explain how it becomes an evidence.

..the problem with theists is that they give any of those above-mentioned things as evidence but they cannot really explain how.

..Example.

Theist: the universe (or humans) is the evidence that God exists.
Atheist: how?
Theist: look at the universe it is so perfect and science cannot still find a solution.

_____WTF.. why would you automatically attribute the origin of the universe to GOD when science cannot explain... CAN you explain that it was GOD?

Life maybe amazing and perfect (wow, really? LOL) but it does not prove GOd..

Universe: The cause of the Big Bang was necessarily spaceless, timeless, and immaterial. There is no reason to believe that a cause can be the sufficient of itself. Therefore the cause is transcendent - and personal - in order to have a causal effect.

Life - all of life depends on DNA. DNA contains the necessary information to sustain and propagate life. The information contained within DNA is like a super computer code. Bill Gates is quoted as saying "DNA is like computer code but far, far more advanced than anything we've ever created."

The last two points have no scientific basis.

The Kalam Cosmological Argument assumes that the same laws that we observe in the universe right now have applied before the start of the universe which at best doesn't seem rational.
I WILL DECIDE WHAT THIS DEBATE IS ABOUT. I AM SPIRITUAL, NOT RELIGIOYUS. YOU DONT HAVE TO BE RELIGIOUS TO BELIEVE IN GOD, AND YOU DO WORSHIP MONEY IF YOU CARE MORE ABOUT YOUR WALLET THAAN YOU DO THE POOR. YOU ARE A TROLL THAT IS OUT FOR ATTENTUION."- SitaraMusica
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,954
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2014 7:35:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/20/2014 6:08:35 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/20/2014 2:20:24 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 12/20/2014 2:45:03 AM, Juris wrote:
If you say any of the following:
1. Universe
2. Humans (life)
3. Bible
4. Faith

...Just explain how it becomes an evidence.

..the problem with theists is that they give any of those above-mentioned things as evidence but they cannot really explain how.

..Example.

Theist: the universe (or humans) is the evidence that God exists.
Atheist: how?
Theist: look at the universe it is so perfect and science cannot still find a solution.

_____WTF.. why would you automatically attribute the origin of the universe to GOD when science cannot explain... CAN you explain that it was GOD?

Life maybe amazing and perfect (wow, really? LOL) but it does not prove GOd..

Universe: The cause of the Big Bang was necessarily spaceless, timeless, and immaterial.
That's a purely false premise and you've been challenged on it dozens of times. How many times do you have to lose this same debate before you realize that pedaling a lie isn't productive? There is no reason to assume that the events leading to big-bang were anything but natural and within the form of time which existed prior to big-bang. You've been refuted by Hawking, refuted by numerous people here and refuted by me.

Actually hawking refuted the need for a natural cause since natural laws would've broken down during the singularity. So there's no reason so assume anything natural pre-existed the Big Bang.

There is no reason to believe that a cause can be the sufficient of itself. Therefore the cause is transcendent - and personal - in order to have a causal effect.
When a rain causes soil to turn into a muddy sludge, leading to a rock falling from the edge of a cliff, which in that chain of causes was transcendent, and in what way was it transcendent. And transcendent of what?

That isn't analogous to my argument. The rain causing rain to exist would be analogous to my argument.

Life - all of life depends on DNA. DNA contains the necessary information to sustain and propagate life. The information contained within DNA is like a super computer code. Bill Gates is quoted as saying "DNA is like computer code but far, far more advanced than anything we've ever created."
Is a virus alive? It doesn't have any DNA. It utilizes RNA which is deemed to be the likely precursor to DNA in abiogenesis. Prior to that is TNA and each subsequent form of genetic code is more complex than its predecessor. Did your transcendent cause keep redesigning the storage system for genetic structure? Are your red blood cells alive? They live for about 120-days on average. Do they contain DNA? No, they do not.

A virus can only hijack a living thing. It can't sustain itself as a separate entity. DNA is contained in the nucleus of a cell..

The last two points have no scientific basis.
None of this continuous diatribe you trot out in a new thread every week or two, has any valid scientific basis.

I'm just seeing the evidence exactly as it is. I have no presupposition to eschew my beliefs. Can you say the same for yourself?
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2014 8:25:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Exactly, religions glorify death and how great death is over life. Even though, their gods supposedly offer them life to live, they can't wait to die.

Well isn't it better to look forward to death than to fear it?

No. Besides, whether you believe in an afterlife or not, everyone fears death. I bet you stop at red lights, and look both ways before crossing the street. If you have ever been to an amusement park, then you have experienced this fear first hand. Amusement park rides capitalize on your fear of death, and that is why your adrenaline spikes.

What would life be like if people lived in fear of dying every day of their lives?

People do live in fear of death everyday. Belief in an afterlife may mitigate the fear, but it in no way removes it. It is a safety blanket, but serves no real purpose when the 'monster' comes.

The bottom line is - we all die, and worrying about death (or hoping for an afterlife) devalues life.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2014 8:45:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/20/2014 8:25:08 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Exactly, religions glorify death and how great death is over life. Even though, their gods supposedly offer them life to live, they can't wait to die.

Well isn't it better to look forward to death than to fear it?

No. Besides, whether you believe in an afterlife or not, everyone fears death. I bet you stop at red lights, and look both ways before crossing the street. If you have ever been to an amusement park, then you have experienced this fear first hand. Amusement park rides capitalize on your fear of death, and that is why your adrenaline spikes.

Everyone does not fear death. If they did, no one would commit suicide and we wouldn't have adrenalin junkies which get high by putting their lives at risk. Being aware of safety and keeping oneself alive has nothing to do with fearing death. That is about loving life and wanting to live it as long as possible. All of us are aware that sooner or later we all die and there is not one thing we can do about it but we can try to delay it as long as possible if we love life.

What would life be like if people lived in fear of dying every day of their lives?

People do live in fear of death everyday. Belief in an afterlife may mitigate the fear, but it in no way removes it. It is a safety blanket, but serves no real purpose when the 'monster' comes.

Some live in constant fear of death but obviously not all do. Any fear of death in people is mainly a fear of the unknown and that is due to the horror stories about what happens to bad people after they die. Humans scare each other with stories about eternal torture.

The bottom line is - we all die, and worrying about death (or hoping for an afterlife) devalues life.

I agree we all die but I disagree that worrying or hoping for anything at all devalues life. Life is filled with hopes and dreams and worries and concerns for all kinds of things whether they are realistic or not. That is all part of life and is what makes life interesting, entertaining and worth living.
Juris
Posts: 109
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2014 9:30:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago

There is no evidence for the existence of an invisible supernatural man named God just as there is no evidence of the existence of an invisible powerful woman named Mother Nature.

These terms, names, labels are personifications of what does exist. The personified titles refer to all you see around you.

Saying nature is evidence of Mother Nature does not mean a supernatural woman exists.
Saying the universe is evidence of God does not mean a supernatural man exists.
It means the word God is just a characterization of the universe and life in general, the same as Mother nature is just a characterization of nature.
The invisible character does not exist. The reality which the character represents, does exist.

the problem with the ideas of others is that they believe that there is one personal God up there.
Idealist
Posts: 2,520
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2014 10:25:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/20/2014 2:45:03 AM, Juris wrote:
If you say any of the following:
1. Universe
2. Humans (life)
3. Bible
4. Faith

...Just explain how it becomes an evidence.

..the problem with theists is that they give any of those above-mentioned things as evidence but they cannot really explain how.

..Example.

Theist: the universe (or humans) is the evidence that God exists.
Atheist: how?
Theist: look at the universe it is so perfect and science cannot still find a solution.

_____WTF.. why would you automatically attribute the origin of the universe to GOD when science cannot explain... CAN you explain that it was GOD?

Life maybe amazing and perfect (wow, really? LOL) but it does not prove GOd..

That's not an accurate description of how most intelligent believers feel. They actually see something more in the universe about them, especially in our own nature. They believe that life has meaning and purpose, which true naturalism totally denies. They believe in heroes and cowards, good and bad, because they can feel those things and they seem totally logical. Only the extremists rely on nothing but blind faith, but then extremists always have a very narrow view.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2014 10:36:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/20/2014 2:45:03 AM, Juris wrote:
If you say any of the following:
1. Universe
2. Humans (life)
3. Bible
4. Faith

...Just explain how it becomes an evidence.

..the problem with theists is that they give any of those above-mentioned things as evidence but they cannot really explain how.

..Example.

Theist: the universe (or humans) is the evidence that God exists.
Atheist: how?
Theist: look at the universe it is so perfect and science cannot still find a solution.

_____WTF.. why would you automatically attribute the origin of the universe to GOD when science cannot explain... CAN you explain that it was GOD?

Life maybe amazing and perfect (wow, really? LOL) but it does not prove GOd..

So when I say life is evidence for God, your counter is "Science just hasn't found out the answer YET".

So my evidence is wrong because... you don't like the conclusion.

You make a good point tho. What counts as evidence for anything. First you have to realize that in the past when Scientist (yeah I'm not talking about goat herders) in the past thought that the universe was Infinite, Luminiferous Aether, The Atom is the smallest thing there is, or that Heavier objects fell faster than lighter ones.

Now did these ideas have NO evidence? Contrary they had evidence, and some were thought to be "Common Sense".

First we have to decide what SYSTEM we are working in. 5 eye witnesses of cops carry a lot of weight in a court of law. But if the 5 witnesses are saying they saw a UFO then that is apparently NO evidence for the skeptic or science. It is illogical to accept 5 consistent testimonies when the statement is something you think is possible. NOW I'm not saying 5 could see a UFO. But I would say what ever they saw made them think they saw a UFO. And if I was investigating that case I would look for causes that could do that.

But HOW ever I chose to investigate that case it would not be the SCIENTIFIC METHOD. Why? Because the scientific method would be impossible to tell me exactly what those 5 people saw. I could conduct experiments to try and recreate the same experience they had... but the recreation is not "PROOF" of what happened. There can be many ways to an end result and recreating just a small piece of the witnessed testimony is sufficient evidence to assert you know what happened. A recreation is only "HIGHLY Likely" when it can account for ALL, hello in law or science this is true, ALL the recorded observations.

Why this basic tenet is being ignored by so many people, is beyond me.

NOT every inquiry can be, or is even conducted in a scientific manner. In-fact most inquiries are not scientific method. But EVERY intelligent reasonable inquiry (including the scientific method) does have some things in common.

For one, they begin with a few assumptions about the world around us. 2. they analyze previous observations. 3. they weigh potential answers against each other.

Many loud mouth Atheist in this forum, think that the only evidence is evidence discerned by the science applying the scientific method. Even Socrates suggested the "truth" can be discovered in the aesthetic arts and beauty of prose as well as reasoning.

So let's see... question "Does God Exist?"
1. We define the terms (which is the first step in any inquiry)

2. Is (as defined in step1) God impossible?
This is the area of logical arguments, because if the concept is impossible like square-circles the investigation is over.

3. Is God (as defined and possible from steps 1+2) detectable?
This is where arguments about the nature of God come in (shikism, epistemology..) Because if God is undetectable the question is mute.

4. What is the Method to study the detectables of God?
There are many methods to investigate matters. We do not use a microscope to investigate galaxies.

5. Once the evidence is assembled can they be explained without God?
This is the weighing of hypothesis and evidence. In statistics for drug trials a correlation is statistically analyzed against a "Null hypothesis". Saying does the "effect" occur even when the principle under investigation is NOT present.

6. Then Make a decision.
Could I be wrong. yes. And any number of arguments could defeat my conclusion at different steps along the way.

The answer "God exists" may be wrong. But so can ANY answer anyone arrives at. What it means is we have the best answer with the available information on hand.

So saying well in the future Science, my Uncle Joe, someone, a new prophet, what-ever will know the answer and it will be different: is fallacious.

Now saying that my belief in a God is unreasonable, after I myself have gone through all these steps means that you are probably lacking critical thinking skills and wouldn't know "Reasonable" if an immaterial abstract universally true concept could fall in your lap.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2014 10:52:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/20/2014 2:45:03 AM, Juris wrote:
If you say any of the following:
1. Universe
2. Humans (life)
3. Bible
4. Faith

...Just explain how it becomes an evidence.

..the problem with theists is that they give any of those above-mentioned things as evidence but they cannot really explain how.

..Example.

Theist: the universe (or humans) is the evidence that God exists.
Atheist: how?
Theist: look at the universe it is so perfect and science cannot still find a solution.

_____WTF.. why would you automatically attribute the origin of the universe to GOD when science cannot explain... CAN you explain that it was GOD?

Life maybe amazing and perfect (wow, really? LOL) but it does not prove GOd..

God is defined as the creator of life on Earth.

If life was created by only natural, meteorological, geological, physical, chemical means then this would be evidence concluding God did not create life.

Could aliens have created life on Earth? sure. this would be replacing God with an entity of more attributes and more properties than needed. Which is heuristically frowned upon by Occam's Razor and others.

The doubt in identifying the Intelligent Designer is inherent in any answer of ID. Because what can the nature of a bike tell you about it's inventor? What can the nature of a beaver damn tell you about what a beaver looks like? Maybe a few small details like big teeth, but not much else.

When it comes to the origins of life there are only 2 sides. abiogenesis or intelligent design (not necessarily God). Making this easier evidence to decipher for or against God.

Does this explain why life intelligently designed is evidence for God. Even if the Intelligent Designer is not God?
bulproof
Posts: 25,218
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2014 11:14:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I think therefore I am.
Is the quote
Not
I think it therefore it is.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2014 11:19:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/20/2014 11:14:40 PM, bulproof wrote:
I think therefore I am.
Is the quote
Not
I think it therefore it is.

With no claims or supporting reasons I must conclude you think not at all.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2014 12:03:52 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/20/2014 8:45:01 PM, Skyangel wrote:
At 12/20/2014 8:25:08 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Exactly, religions glorify death and how great death is over life. Even though, their gods supposedly offer them life to live, they can't wait to die.

Well isn't it better to look forward to death than to fear it?

No. Besides, whether you believe in an afterlife or not, everyone fears death. I bet you stop at red lights, and look both ways before crossing the street. If you have ever been to an amusement park, then you have experienced this fear first hand. Amusement park rides capitalize on your fear of death, and that is why your adrenaline spikes.

Everyone does not fear death.

Sure they do. It is instinctive. We strive to survive (at least anyone who is not broken in some way).

If they did, no one would commit suicide and we wouldn't have adrenalin junkies which get high by putting their lives at risk. Being aware of safety and keeping oneself alive has nothing to do with fearing death. That is about loving life and wanting to live it as long as possible. All of us are aware that sooner or later we all die and there is not one thing we can do about it but we can try to delay it as long as possible if we love life.



What would life be like if people lived in fear of dying every day of their lives?

People do live in fear of death everyday. Belief in an afterlife may mitigate the fear, but it in no way removes it. It is a safety blanket, but serves no real purpose when the 'monster' comes.

Some live in constant fear of death but obviously not all do. Any fear of death in people is mainly a fear of the unknown and that is due to the horror stories about what happens to bad people after they die. Humans scare each other with stories about eternal torture.

The bottom line is - we all die, and worrying about death (or hoping for an afterlife) devalues life.

I agree we all die but I disagree that worrying or hoping for anything at all devalues life.

I was more specific than hope in general. The safety blanket is not hope, and that does not diminish life. When someone lives there life in a fearful way because they are afraid of a bad afterlife (or hoping for a good afterlife), then their physical life is being altered by this belief. This belief may not alter their actions (most people don't want to murder, rape, lie, etc.), but their perspective may be altered greatly. Instead of seeing a world full of sinners who deserve to burn (they should be trying to "save"), they could be looking at the world in a much more open minded way. I imagine this would consist of getting outside of irrational comfort zones more often, less judgemental behaviour (gays), and less dogma.

Life is filled with hopes and dreams and worries and concerns for all kinds of things whether they are realistic or not. That is all part of life and is what makes life interesting, entertaining and worth living.

Oh, I agree with this.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2014 12:06:04 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/20/2014 9:30:17 PM, Juris wrote:

There is no evidence for the existence of an invisible supernatural man named God just as there is no evidence of the existence of an invisible powerful woman named Mother Nature.

These terms, names, labels are personifications of what does exist. The personified titles refer to all you see around you.

Saying nature is evidence of Mother Nature does not mean a supernatural woman exists.
Saying the universe is evidence of God does not mean a supernatural man exists.
It means the word God is just a characterization of the universe and life in general, the same as Mother nature is just a characterization of nature.
The invisible character does not exist. The reality which the character represents, does exist.


the problem with the ideas of others is that they believe that there is one personal God up there.

How do you define God if not as a personal supernatural entity who you can talk to like an invisible friend?
bulproof
Posts: 25,218
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2014 12:07:49 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/20/2014 11:19:30 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 12/20/2014 11:14:40 PM, bulproof wrote:
I think therefore I am.
Is the quote
Not
I think it therefore it is.

With no claims or supporting reasons I must conclude you think not at all.

I see my comments are, as always, far to profound for you.
Keep trying little one, the fruit is in the jar.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2014 12:23:01 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/21/2014 12:03:52 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/20/2014 8:45:01 PM, Skyangel wrote:
At 12/20/2014 8:25:08 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Exactly, religions glorify death and how great death is over life. Even though, their gods supposedly offer them life to live, they can't wait to die.

Well isn't it better to look forward to death than to fear it?

No. Besides, whether you believe in an afterlife or not, everyone fears death. I bet you stop at red lights, and look both ways before crossing the street. If you have ever been to an amusement park, then you have experienced this fear first hand. Amusement park rides capitalize on your fear of death, and that is why your adrenaline spikes.

Everyone does not fear death.

Sure they do. It is instinctive. We strive to survive (at least anyone who is not broken in some way).

Then explain why some commit suicide if they fear death?

If they did, no one would commit suicide and we wouldn't have adrenalin junkies which get high by putting their lives at risk. Being aware of safety and keeping oneself alive has nothing to do with fearing death. That is about loving life and wanting to live it as long as possible. All of us are aware that sooner or later we all die and there is not one thing we can do about it but we can try to delay it as long as possible if we love life.



What would life be like if people lived in fear of dying every day of their lives?

People do live in fear of death everyday. Belief in an afterlife may mitigate the fear, but it in no way removes it. It is a safety blanket, but serves no real purpose when the 'monster' comes.

Some live in constant fear of death but obviously not all do. Any fear of death in people is mainly a fear of the unknown and that is due to the horror stories about what happens to bad people after they die. Humans scare each other with stories about eternal torture.

The bottom line is - we all die, and worrying about death (or hoping for an afterlife) devalues life.

I agree we all die but I disagree that worrying or hoping for anything at all devalues life.

I was more specific than hope in general. The safety blanket is not hope, and that does not diminish life. When someone lives there life in a fearful way because they are afraid of a bad afterlife (or hoping for a good afterlife), then their physical life is being altered by this belief. This belief may not alter their actions (most people don't want to murder, rape, lie, etc.), but their perspective may be altered greatly. Instead of seeing a world full of sinners who deserve to burn (they should be trying to "save"), they could be looking at the world in a much more open minded way. I imagine this would consist of getting outside of irrational comfort zones more often, less judgemental behaviour (gays), and less dogma.

Hoping for a good afterlife or being afraid of a bad afterlife obviously does affect the way people behave in reality. It makes them superstitious and fearful of unwanted consequences. It might make some behave better than they would if they did not believe in any afterlife at all but anyone who is basically good at heart has no need to be coaxed or threatened to "be good or else". They are inherently good by nature.
Many religious people like their comfort zones and are afraid to leave them for fear of hell and damnation. Religion brainwashes its members with their dogma and the members become like puppets on a string who believe their God is pulling the strings and take no responsibility for their own irrationality and foolishness.

Life is filled with hopes and dreams and worries and concerns for all kinds of things whether they are realistic or not. That is all part of life and is what makes life interesting, entertaining and worth living.

Oh, I agree with this.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2014 12:25:40 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/21/2014 12:23:01 AM, Skyangel wrote:
At 12/21/2014 12:03:52 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/20/2014 8:45:01 PM, Skyangel wrote:
At 12/20/2014 8:25:08 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Exactly, religions glorify death and how great death is over life. Even though, their gods supposedly offer them life to live, they can't wait to die.

Well isn't it better to look forward to death than to fear it?

No. Besides, whether you believe in an afterlife or not, everyone fears death. I bet you stop at red lights, and look both ways before crossing the street. If you have ever been to an amusement park, then you have experienced this fear first hand. Amusement park rides capitalize on your fear of death, and that is why your adrenaline spikes.

Everyone does not fear death.

Sure they do. It is instinctive. We strive to survive (at least anyone who is not broken in some way).

Then explain why some commit suicide if they fear death?

They are broken. I know that is very simplistic, but it is accurate.

If they did, no one would commit suicide and we wouldn't have adrenalin junkies which get high by putting their lives at risk. Being aware of safety and keeping oneself alive has nothing to do with fearing death. That is about loving life and wanting to live it as long as possible. All of us are aware that sooner or later we all die and there is not one thing we can do about it but we can try to delay it as long as possible if we love life.



What would life be like if people lived in fear of dying every day of their lives?

People do live in fear of death everyday. Belief in an afterlife may mitigate the fear, but it in no way removes it. It is a safety blanket, but serves no real purpose when the 'monster' comes.

Some live in constant fear of death but obviously not all do. Any fear of death in people is mainly a fear of the unknown and that is due to the horror stories about what happens to bad people after they die. Humans scare each other with stories about eternal torture.

The bottom line is - we all die, and worrying about death (or hoping for an afterlife) devalues life.

I agree we all die but I disagree that worrying or hoping for anything at all devalues life.

I was more specific than hope in general. The safety blanket is not hope, and that does not diminish life. When someone lives there life in a fearful way because they are afraid of a bad afterlife (or hoping for a good afterlife), then their physical life is being altered by this belief. This belief may not alter their actions (most people don't want to murder, rape, lie, etc.), but their perspective may be altered greatly. Instead of seeing a world full of sinners who deserve to burn (they should be trying to "save"), they could be looking at the world in a much more open minded way. I imagine this would consist of getting outside of irrational comfort zones more often, less judgemental behaviour (gays), and less dogma.

Hoping for a good afterlife or being afraid of a bad afterlife obviously does affect the way people behave in reality. It makes them superstitious and fearful of unwanted consequences. It might make some behave better than they would if they did not believe in any afterlife at all but anyone who is basically good at heart has no need to be coaxed or threatened to "be good or else". They are inherently good by nature.
Many religious people like their comfort zones and are afraid to leave them for fear of hell and damnation. Religion brainwashes its members with their dogma and the members become like puppets on a string who believe their God is pulling the strings and take no responsibility for their own irrationality and foolishness.

Life is filled with hopes and dreams and worries and concerns for all kinds of things whether they are realistic or not. That is all part of life and is what makes life interesting, entertaining and worth living.

Oh, I agree with this.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2014 12:43:00 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/21/2014 12:25:40 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/21/2014 12:23:01 AM, Skyangel wrote:
At 12/21/2014 12:03:52 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/20/2014 8:45:01 PM, Skyangel wrote:

Everyone does not fear death.

Sure they do. It is instinctive. We strive to survive (at least anyone who is not broken in some way).

Then explain why some commit suicide if they fear death?

They are broken. I know that is very simplistic, but it is accurate.

Maybe so but the fact remains "broken" people exist in this world and they obviously think death would be better than life. Maybe it's the only way they believe they will gain an inner peace or escape from whatever reality they are trying to escape.

Therefore you cannot honestly claim "everyone" fears death. You could claim most people do but the word "everyone" is all encompassing regardless of whether people are "broken" or not.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2014 12:48:42 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/21/2014 12:43:00 AM, Skyangel wrote:
At 12/21/2014 12:25:40 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/21/2014 12:23:01 AM, Skyangel wrote:
At 12/21/2014 12:03:52 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/20/2014 8:45:01 PM, Skyangel wrote:

Everyone does not fear death.

Sure they do. It is instinctive. We strive to survive (at least anyone who is not broken in some way).

Then explain why some commit suicide if they fear death?

They are broken. I know that is very simplistic, but it is accurate.

Maybe so but the fact remains "broken" people exist in this world and they obviously think death would be better than life. Maybe it's the only way they believe they will gain an inner peace or escape from whatever reality they are trying to escape.

Therefore you cannot honestly claim "everyone" fears death. You could claim most people do but the word "everyone" is all encompassing regardless of whether people are "broken" or not.

Ok, fair enough. Most people fear death. ;-)
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Philocat
Posts: 728
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2014 5:15:41 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
It is true that many theists are not adept at turning these observations into arguments into God's existence. However, it can be done quite easily by someone with a basic grasp of philosophical logic.

If you'd like, I'll show you how :)