Atheism

[evo]

Hehe,thats quite a list of 'committed atheists'

 

[tigertime2]

Disco, here is an article that answers one of your list, but read the whole paper through with an open mind, it has some very good points - also note the 45 resource papers listed at the end, if you care to verify what is written by all means do so

http://www.bible.edu/index.cfm?PAGE_ID=1668&EXPAND=

 

[tigertime2]

I really dont have much to say about all this stuff, but i always wonder if the christians realise how flimsy and silly their stuff sounds? it bothers me cos i like foxy and have got to know him a little bit, and dj and the others seem really bright and intelligent but i still cant see how they believe what they do other than it got deeply shoved into them when they were kids.

i remember when i was at uni and the fundamentalists used to always approach anyone who was on their own or who looked upset. these were the 'weak' targets.

that annoyed me and i used to tell them to *smile* off, but i wonder if some of the christians here have been captured at similar moments of weakness?

and i dont mean weakness in a bad way, but just when u are vulnerable.

i would understand that.

i dunno, all of u guys with yr big bangs and wittensteins and eyeless fish and dna and stuff, u know i cant be bothered with it.

it seems like theres this gap, yknow, some of u guys seem to have had some road to damascus moment and some of us havent and ne'er the twain shall meet.

i dont want to die, cos this is all i have. i want to be happy and to be loved and to love. but there aint no god there directing my path.

some of u will see this as sad, i see it as liberating.

I appreciate your comments Sixpack. I can understand where you are coming from.

 

[Disco08]

Disco, here is an article that answers one of your list, but read the whole paper through with an open mind, it has some very good points - also note the 45 resource papers listed at the end, if you care to verify what is written by all means do so

http://www.bible.edu/index.cfm?PAGE_ID=1668&EXPAND=

A paper 'proving' the existence of a soul has what exactly to do with what we were discussing?

You know tigertime, I think you could show a little more respect to this discussion. All you seem to be doing is preaching, changing topics and ignoring/dodging questions. As I've said to Jay before, if you want to preach, start a new thread and go for it. If you want to contribute to actual discussions on these topics I think you need to try a little harder.

 

[Freezer]

A paper 'proving' the existence of a soul has what exactly to do with what we were discussing?

You know tigertime, I think you could show a little more respect to this discussion. All you seem to be doing is preaching, changing topics and ignoring/dodging questions. As I've said to Jay before, if you want to preach, start a new thread and go for it. If you want to contribute to actual discussions on these topics I think you need to try a little harder.

Not sure that's fair, Disco. He's just putting forward arguments for his beliefs. No differnt to the Athiests quoting scientific papers.

I see this thread as a bit pointless now. There's never going to be a meeting point - it's just going round and round in circles. Some have faith to believe things that can't be explained. Others don't.

 

[Six Pack]

i enjoyed that Ricky Gervais clip though. That made it worth it. :clap

 

[evo]

Why do people keep putting in posts saying this threads all waste of time and we are polar oppsities etc.If your not interested,just don't read it.It's not mandatory.

Personally I reckon this is about the most interesting subject in life.

 

[Disco08]

Not sure that's fair, Disco. He's just putting forward arguments for his beliefs. No differnt to the Athiests quoting scientific papers.

I see this thread as a bit pointless now. There's never going to be a meeting point - it's just going round and round in circles. Some have faith to believe things that can't be explained. Others don't.

Well we've been shown a few examples of atheists converting to faith so maybe there is still hope Freezer.

As for what I said to tigertime, I don't think it's unfair at all. If you care to read back over the last 30 pages of this thread you'll find any number of examples of the things I mentioned. All I'm asking is that he engage in the discussion in a reasonable manner.

 

[Freezer]

Why do people keep putting in posts saying this threads all waste of time and we are polar oppsities etc.If your not interested,just don't read it.It's not mandatory.

Personally I reckon this is about the most interesting subject in life.

I've read just about every post as it's been posted. The arguments are going round in circles. I enjoy reading it too but there's only so many times I can read "I believe the Bible" and "The Bible's too ridiculous to be true". Those with Faith have an intangible trust in their God which those that don't find difficult to understand. There's no right or wrong to the presented arguments - just a willingness by one side to believe and a need by others for proof before they believe.

But perhaps you're right - I can no longer be bothered to read.

 

[evo]

I've read just about every post as it's been posted. The arguments are going round in circles. I enjoy reading it too but there's only so many times I can read "I believe the Bible" and "The Bible's too ridiculous to be true". Those with Faith have an intangible trust in their God which those that don't find difficult to understand. There's no right or wrong to the presented arguments - just a willingness by one side to believe and a need by others for proof before they believe.

But perhaps you're right - I can no longer be bothered to read.

fair enough I suppose.

I try to spice it up with a bit of secular philosophy from time to time but no one seems much interested or responds to that. So i go back to heckling Djevv. ;D

 

[tigertime2]

A paper 'proving' the existence of a soul has what exactly to do with what we were discussing?

You know tigertime, I think you could show a little more respect to this discussion. All you seem to be doing is preaching, changing topics and ignoring/dodging questions. As I've said to Jay before, if you want to preach, start a new thread and go for it. If you want to contribute to actual discussions on these topics I think you need to try a little harder.

Easterbrook, Gregg, 1997. Science and God: a warming trend? Science 277: 890-893.

 

[tigertime2]

Hi Disco, that was a response to some of the ideas promoted in one of your links
Easterbrook, Gregg, 1997. Science and God: a warming trend? Science 277: 890-893.

Would you like me to go through all the links and provide an alternate view to what each person and there subject? i can if you want me to?

 

[Disco08]

I'm still struggling to see what that had to do with what we were discussing tigertime. The link I posted for you to read if you wanted was in response to your post about Noah's Ark. Can you tell me what the link you posted has to do with Noah's Ark?

I'd be very interested in your opinion on any of the specific points made on the page I linked to.

 

[tigertime2]

A paper 'proving' the existence of a soul has what exactly to do with what we were discussing?

You know tigertime, I think you could show a little more respect to this discussion. All you seem to be doing is preaching, changing topics and ignoring/dodging questions. As I've said to Jay before, if you want to preach, start a new thread and go for it. If you want to contribute to actual discussions on these topics I think you need to try a little harder.

thanks for the feedback, i appreciate your comments

 

[Disco08]

Good one, I appreciate you taking them the way I intended.

 

[Panthera tigris FC]

So because you have never seen or experienced something, you presume that it is impossible. As for 'dodgy' websites, isn't the content of the articles and their correctness the important thing. What is your criterion of dodgyness?

Not just me! One of the beautiful things about the scientific method is that you don't have to take the word of anyone, the evidence must be presented and laid bare for analysis and criticism. This helps stave off vested interests, corruption, bias etc. that 'take my word for it' explanations are prone to. I have yet to see a convincing supernatural occurrence, and I am not alone in this matter. Why do you think that is?

Dodgyness would relate to the standard of evidence. Anecdotal evidence is weak and prone to the vagaries of perception and change over time. In this day and age why haven't any supernatural events ever been documented in a fashion that would permit confirmation? Or put another way, why does God hate amputees?

The bedrock of my Faith is the reports of many honest men about the events in Judea 2000 years ago. Men who died for their faith. You repeatedly claim this evidence is inadequate but never given an answer.

There are questions over the very existence of some of these men and yet you claim to know that they were honest? Again the standard of evidence is weak. Independent, corroborating evidence would be required for me to be convinced - especially of the more extravagant claims.

The evidence. What other faith has evidence remotely comparable to Christianity?

I bet every other religion would argue that they do! When it comes down to it the supernatural beliefs are faith-based, as for every other religion. Yet you cling to Chrisitianity. I wonder if you were born in, say, Iran, whether you would feel the same?

So since evolution occured (in your opinion) there is no God? How do you come to this conclusion?

Where did I say that? Evolutionary theory certainly fills a big gap that was once the sole domain of God, but it in of itself says nothing about the existence of God. My point was about the mental gymnastics that you do to explain the evidence to fit in with your faith-based beliefs. You seem to like to call on Occam's Razor in some circumstances, but to disregard it in others.

Nearly every 'logical inconsistency' has been repeatedly answered. What make you think that evrrything about the Bible will be easy ??? - aha I know your lack of knowledge about it! Have you ever seen documents that are not open to intepretation?

I would think that God would make such matters pretty straight forward....but I often forget what type of God we are talking about here!

As for my lack of knowledge in the Bible, you may find that it is you that is being presumptuous. I have read it numerous times and formally studied it, in both a 'believers' setting and in a more critical setting. I know your points, I just dispute them.

You still haven't addressed my point that if the Bible is open to interpretation, which you concede, how come you seem to have the monopoly on the correct interpretation?

This is the logical problem of evil, which is a difficult, but has the freewill defence which has been mentioned previously.

But why create a universe that would lead to this? He knew it was coming? There can't be suffering if you go into it with open eyes! And don't say he needed to do it to save us, because he created US that way too!

Revelation and evidence. The only way you could know.

Define revelation.

What verifiable evidence do you have of the creator?

Above. Given a supernatural creator miracles are not unreasonable.

I haven't conceded the supernatural creator, so of course I am still sceptical of this. I also addressed the issue of miracles above.

Evidence is helpful, but if we are designed by God to be one with him, then evidence is actually not important. When we have faith we are simply functioning correctly. Our nature is evidence in and of it's self.

That is convenient and all however it doesn't explain contradictory evidence nor the existence of other religions.

Pointed out on the basis of other presuppositions.

And round we go! What are these presuppositions? Naturalism? I have explained that.

I actually don't, you simply do the best you can. Does anything in this life give you 100% certainty? He is comprehensible enough for me to have faith is what I am trying to say. Aren't there always gaps in our knowledge?

So we must question the basis of that belief....a feeling of certainty, combined with a book that gives meaning and context to that feeling? It seems that all religions work that way.

What I meant is I don't preclude other religions from having a supernatural origin. Nor do I preclude them from having some revelation of God. Christianity is the most complete revelation of the Almighty, yes.

On what do you base that though? The adherents of the other religions could say the same. However both can't be true due to the exclusivity of these beliefs.

Does your naturalistic, evolutionary origins absolutely guarantee that your logic is logical and your reasoning reasonable? This is what I'm asking. My beliefs do!

Well I know that 1 plus 1 equals 2 and I can calculate probabilities and on that basis I can have a quantitative measure of confidence. Your beliefs give you a sense of certainty, but you have to look at those beliefs and look at the likelihood of them being correct. You still haven't addressed the core of my question though.

You once said that the anthropic principle argument amounted to the same as a fish wondering if the pond he lived in was made 'just for him'. Perhaps you were being serious . I think the argument is more powerful than that. The Big Bang has existance originating from non-existance ???. Not nothing, non-existance; to me a very powerful argument for God.

I said that Douglas Adams described the anthropic principle as a puddle discovering that it fit its position perfectly. The Big Bang theory does not neccesarily postulate a beginning from nothing...just a beginning to our universe as we know it. There are alternatives to nothing posultated as Evo points out (eg the multiverse).

15 byrs according to the latest estimate.

Do you subscribe to this?

BTW...thankyou for taking the time to address my questions. For all of the posters on here you at least try to address the questions, even if we disagree. I find it quite enlightening in many ways to listen to your POV.

 

[evo]

My plastic Jesus has returned!!

This is a sign.Surely.

 

[Tiger74]

My plastic Jesus has returned!!

This is a sign.Surely.

yeah, a sign that Evo shouldn't drink that 12th pint of Guiness or else plastic Jesus ends up in odd places (where was he, the freezer, the sock drawer, at the Spearmint Rhino?)

 

[evo]

I'm talking of my Plastic Jesus avatar.It disappeared for 24 hours and now has mysteriously returned.

Spooky.

(Spearmint Rhino, pfft.As if the son-of-God,even a plastic one, would have to pay to get sum)

 

[Tiger74]

I'm talking of my Plastic Jesus avatar.It disappeared for 24 hours and now has mysteriously returned.

Spooky.

(Spearmint Rhino, pfft.As if the son-of-God,even a plastic one, would have to pay to get sum)

I can make this even more spooky. The reason I thought you were referring to a plastic Jesus at home was all yesterday your avatar was working on my PC (I remember because I checked when I read your first message and it was still there).

Maybe we need to get Jay to look into this....why would motorcycle riding plastic Jesus make himself unseen to Evo