There are No Conscientious Explanations to Disprove the Proof for God and Jesus Being God

[dystopian]

Still avoiding the proof for God and who God is? I like that.

1. Something can't come from nothing.

Already shown by many people to be wrong.

2. Infinite regress is impossible.

Repeatedly shown by me and others to be wrong.

3. Nobody can find a naturalistic explanation to account for the eyewitness testimony of the Apostles.

Naturalistic explanations have repeatedly been shown for these supposed eyewitness testimonies.


Countdown to revivin repeating the above again without addressing any of the numerous arguments in this thread as to why he's wrong in 3... 2... 1...

 

[Keith&Co.]

Grade 7'ers know this too. Quantum scientists don't think something comes from nothing. Funny.

Seventh grade.
That's when my peers told me that if someone shakes you awake and you punch them, you can't be prosecuted for assault because scientists have shown you're really asleep for 43 seconds after you wake up.

They also 'KNEW' that you could detect STD's by sticking a coin in a girl's slot. If it came out clean, she was alright, if it came out tarnished, you should not tap that keg.

And they knew you could defeat a radar gun by stuffing aluminum foil in the car's front and rear bumpers.

And they knew if the judge sent you to the Marines, you could get out of bootcamp by pretending to be a conscientious objector and all you had to do was when the drill instructor beat at you, don't hit back.

I notice, Troy, that you don't actually publish anything peer-reviewed by seventh graders to bolster your case. I notice you don't post anything that's actually been peer reviewed by actual experts in any field that would support your claims.
I'm guessing this is because you never really have seen any evidence for anything you spout off about.
You make shit up, and are convinced that saying 'scholars agree' or 'scholars know' or any sort of preamble like that would make it sound good.

But people keep asking you for evidence of your claims, which you got none of. Even 7th graders know when the teacher says 'show your work' you look stupid by saying that other students got the same answer.

 

[George S]

Still avoiding the proof for God and who God is? I like that.

1. Something can't come from nothing.

Even God.

2. Infinite regress is impossible.

Infinite X is thrown out of scientific theories.

3. Nobody can find a naturalistic explanation to account for the eyewitness testimony of the Apostles.

Just as nobody can find naturalistic explanations for the testimony of Harry Potter. It is fiction.

So simple even you are "without excuse" (Rom. 1.20), yes, even you.

You see, a story is just a story. Any story may be invented. The credibility we give a story varies by story. A story with impossibilities -- things that cannot happen -- things that have no natural explanation -- are fiction.

 

[funinspace]

To repeat for the zombies in the house. The reason why something can't come from nothing is because a square circle can't cause anything because it doesn't exist. Non-existence has no thermodynamics, particles, etc. to cause something.

The other reason something can't come from nothing is because of the overwhelming preponderance of evidence beyond a reasonable doubt from seeing trillions of cause and effects in nature, but not a shred of evidence of something from nothing. So if you were a betting man with odds against you more than a trillion to 1, you would surely lose. I'll take the other side of the bet.

A grade 5'er understands this, so the only reason you don't accept it is because atheism is not just a rejection of God but a state of delusion.

Hum…I wasn’t studying DifEQ and somewhat advanced physics until my sophmore year while getting my EE degree. How many 5th graders do you think are ready to discuss Christian eschatology with full consideration of the whole Bible and the history of Christian theological interpretation? I think I’ll take the postulations and theories of the world’s top physicists over your 5th grade understanding of very complex subjects. But feel free to continue in your mindless and vacuous exchanges with those willing to respond to your dribble.

Seems people want to talk about anything but the proof of God and the resurrection proof of Jesus:

1. Something can't come from nothing.

This has nothing to do with the existence of a Jesus-God. At best it makes it the existence of some all-powerful entity(s) a possibility.

2. Infinite regress is impossible.

This has nothing to do with the existence of a Jesus-God. At best it makes it the existence of some all-powerful entity(s) a possibility.

3. Nobody can find a naturalistic explanation to account for the eyewitness testimony of the Apostles in various group settings.

And you haven’t provided a naturalistic explanation for the birthing pains of the Latter Day Saints. Cha Ching…

Personally, I really have no desire to engage in 5th grade debates on things like quantum mechanics, infinite regression, et.al. If you want to discuss the reasonableness of the theology you cleave to, you could always address my post #285 in which I dissected your false claims on the history of the formation of the Bible.

 

[funinspace]

So simple even you are "without excuse" (Rom. 1.20), yes, even you.

Funny thing is that you are are also without excuse, as Allah has warned even you. I got a reminder on that during last nights newscast where they were interviewing 4 Muslims in London...

 

[funinspace]

Grade 7'ers know this too. Quantum scientists don't think something comes from nothing. Funny.

Does repeating a lie, make you feel better?

Another source demonstrating that theoretical physicists don't agree with you. Never mind, who cares what 7th graders "know"...I know I wouldn't take my own 7th grade opinion, as I was more interesting in skateboarding, girls, music, movies, and hanging out.
http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/nstv/2011/07/how-the-universe-appeared-from-nothing.html

There's no such thing as a free lunch, or so the saying goes, but that may not be true on the grandest, cosmic scale. Many physicists now believe that the universe arose out of nothingness during the Big Bang which means that nothing must have somehow turned into something. How could that be possible?

 

[funinspace]

They also 'KNEW' that you could detect STD's by sticking a coin in a girl's slot. If it came out clean, she was alright, if it came out tarnished, you should not tap that keg.

You were weird in 7th grade. I believed my sex-ed over stuff like that.

But people keep asking you for evidence of your claims, which you got none of. Even 7th graders know when the teacher says 'show your work' you look stupid by saying that other students got the same answer.

Right on the nail.

 

[Keith&Co.]

You were weird in 7th grade. I believed my sex-ed over stuff like that.

Heh. This WAS my sex-ed stuff in school. South Idaho figured that if they never talked about sex, we'd never know it existed until our wedding night.
Meaning that i learned about it from my peers.
Who were just as dangerously uninformed, but quite willing to teach me things anyway.

One of my classmates overheard two mothers talking about teenagers getting 'hurt' by having premarital sex. He deduced that 'there're teeth in there. Or at least a sharp corner. That's why virgins bleed the first time, you have to know how to punch out all their teeth or you get bitten off when she comes.'
And we said: Really? Wow.

But people keep asking you for evidence of your claims, which you got none of. Even 7th graders know when the teacher says 'show your work' you look stupid by saying that other students got the same answer.

Right on the nail.

Thanx.

 

[funinspace]

Heh. This WAS my sex-ed stuff in school. South Idaho figured that if they never talked about sex, we'd never know it existed until our wedding night.
Meaning that i learned about it from my peers.
Who were just as dangerously uninformed, but quite willing to teach me things anyway.

So what happens in Burley stays in Burley; and the sheep live in fear of cowboys

Geesh...I got my sex ed in mainstream Protestant church, where sex wasn't a 4 letter word. Though the school had a dumb one too...

 

[funinspace]

Grade 7'ers know this too. Quantum scientists don't think something comes from nothing. Funny.

Taking this a bit further… fundamentalist/evangelical 5th or 7th graders may have your understanding (if at all) because their parents and church have drilled it into their heads. The reality is that their understanding is little more than a parrot having “understanding”. When my friend’s 2 boys were in 5th and 7th grade, they understood what physicists know at the most basic level, as their dad has a PHD in physics. But were those boys understanding something to crow about?

My son loved the nature-science channel growing up…and I somehow don’t think he had your “understanding”. He sure as hell doesn’t have your “understanding” now that he is in college.

The reality is that most 5th or 7th graders don’t spend time pondering infinite regression nor “something from nothing”…but they might be getting seriously bored with singing “There's gonna be a floody, floody”. Maybe you should try for a tad more maturity…just sayin.

 

[funinspace]

Today I learned atheists are self-abusive and they like it. They will fit right in at home in Hell. That's why they don't give their lives to Christ. They can't see the joy and the peace in Christ living the perfect life so we may be Christlike so no longer it is we who live but He lives in us by the Holy Spirit. Atheists are too afraid to take that leap of faith always in control of self. What a heavy load.

LOL...I grew up mainstream Protestant, and shifted to evangelical Christianity in college. I did that in full Monty mode for a dozen years before the cracks started forming. It was scary at first letting go of the God-Jesus construct, but in the end, I have been much happier thank you. You see I no longer have to make excuses for a purported god, that is to be glorified within a dogma including an eternal Auschwitz for 4-6 billion individual people…talk about self-abusive, kind of like a spouse justifying why their other half beats them as being their own fault.

 

[Keith&Co.]

kind of like a spouse justifying why their other half beats them as being their own fault.

I've always thought that a lot of the apologist efforts to solve the Problem of Evil come across as a child abuser.

"God loves you, but if you're going to spit on his Word, he's got no choice but to set you on fire. Just like when you wouldn't polish your Uncle Durley's joystick, and he had to dislocate your arm. That's because he loved you, but you didn't know your place in the Babysitter/Baby relationship. God and Uncle Durley gave you every chance to be a good boy, but in the end, you forced their hand...."

 

[Kharakov]

Something comes from nothing all the time, everywhere.

I don't get this whole something from nothing claim- I've seen this comment a few times recently on the forum, and I'm wondering at its justification? Maybe a new thread? It's just something that I'd like to read more about- see if there is any logical loophole, or interesting trick, that can be used to justify it?

Obviously if there is nothing, it will not give arise to anything. If fact, the only thing nothing does is it utterly doesn't oppose what exists. Note that the whole "zero=nothing" is way off track.

 

[dystopian]

Obviously if there is nothing, it will not give arise to anything.

Actually, that is not obvious at all. It's just your gut telling you that nothing can come from nothing. However, the problem is that the opposite; that *something* has *always* existed; is just as 'obviously' "not true". Both possibilities, that existence was always here, or that existence had a definite beginning, equally defy reason. Given our lack of sufficient data, stating either of these possibilities to be obviously true or false is flat-out absurd.

 

[Keith&Co.]

It is my experience that if i drive a car at 10 mph, and someone comes towards me, head on, at 10 mph, the driver of the car appears, to me, to be approaching at 20 mph.
But then, if i was flying a spaceship at 90% of the speed of light, and someone was coming towards me at 90% of the speed of light, it would seem obvious based on my experiences with speed that the spaceship pilot would appear to be approaching me at 180% of the speed of light.
But he does not. Rather, he approaches at (IIRC) .99c.
At the speeds involved, my experiences at way-sub-light speed cannot be dependably trusted to predict the observations that will be made at relativistic speeds.

Thus, if someone were to insist that things behave the same way at relativistic speeds as they do crossing the WalMart parking lot, i might be motivated to ask for their evidence. When did they make the observations that this version of reality is more true than what actually competent physicists describe?

When they have no observatoins, no math, cannot even frame an experiment that would provide this info, but they say 'even 7th graders know this,' it's just time to pat them on the head and let them go back to watching the Herculoids.

 

[dystopian]

When they have no observatoins, no math, cannot even frame an experiment that would provide this info, but they say 'even 7th graders know this,' it's just time to pat them on the head and let them go back to watching the Herculoids.

Clearly you've never learned that all of reality can be understood by relying on your gut. Except on days you have indigestion.

 

[KeepTalking]

I just skipped about 20 pages worth of posts, has Troy been banned again yet?

 

[Malintent]

I can't help but laugh at the notion that infinate regress is impossible, because "now" would never have happened. I guess it "proves" the imposiblity of the existance of "infinity"... afterall, if the universe is infinite, then by that same logic, there is no "here".

 

[dystopian]

I can't help but laugh at the notion that infinate regress is impossible, because "now" would never have happened.

His objection was that it's impossible because "you" would have *already* happened. Which is an even more ridiculous objection to infinite regress; as I must've explained in excruciating detail to him half a dozen times or so. It's not like there's some sort of rule saying "you" can't happen twice.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Clearly you've never learned that all of reality can be understood by relying on your gut. Except on days you have indigestion.

"Your results may be an undigested bit of beef, a blot of mustard, a crumb of cheese, a fragment of underdone potato. There's more of excrement than of experiment about your findings, sir."

- - - Updated - - -

His objection was that it's impossible because "you" would have *already* happened. Which is an even more ridiculous objection to infinite regress; as I must've explained in excruciating detail to him half a dozen times or so. It's not like there's some sort of rule saying "you" can't happen twice.

Hehe. I see what you did there. Very funny.
You repeatedly explain why repeating yourself isn't proof against infinite regress.
Droll.