• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

If You Are Certain God Exists Why Prove It?

Learner said:
which is fair, since I would use the term 'sci-fi' for things like abiogenesis.
Click to expand...

You remind me of a bookseller in Houston. When I asked her why The Princess Bride was in the SciFi section, she said, "Because I don't like it!"
 
Something I find sadly amusing is this.

The number of people who insist that the evidence for speciation through natural selection doesn't reach their high standards for evidence. But the evidence for Jesus's Death and Resurrection does.

What's with that?
Tom
 
TomC said:
Something I find sadly amusing is this.

The number of people who insist that the evidence for speciation through natural selection doesn't reach their high standards for evidence. But the evidence for Jesus's Death and Resurrection does.

What's with that?
Tom
Click to expand...

I think we are still aproaching that refining process (for lack of better wording) with the theology/ scholastics and sciences. From the theist POV, I 've changed my views quite a few times on certain things or interpretations as I would learn more about the faith concept. Even with what seemed to be good arguments.. for and against, years ago.. are today through progession, now redundant.
 
Learner said:
when there's an unknown "HOW it's done" process, even if we're to say God did it. "It apears to be like magic" method unknown or observed, so therefore magic, which is fair since I would use the term 'sci-fi' for things like abiogenesis.
Click to expand...
But if you don't know how it was done, and an omnipotent god could do it any way it wanted, including by "apparently" unguided chance, how the fuck did you eliminate abiogenesis?

What, exactly, prevents god from having programmed everything into the laws of science at time zero, then letting it work itself out?

(Meaningless babble defense in three....two...)
 
Keith&Co. said:
Learner said:
when there's an unknown "HOW it's done" process, even if we're to say God did it. "It apears to be like magic" method unknown or observed, so therefore magic, which is fair since I would use the term 'sci-fi' for things like abiogenesis.
Click to expand...
But if you don't know how it was done, and an omnipotent god could do it any way it wanted, including by "apparently" unguided chance, how the fuck did you eliminate abiogenesis?

What, exactly, prevents god from having programmed everything into the laws of science at time zero, then letting it work itself out?

(mean...)
Click to expand...
Nothing prevents that.
In fact the Bible states that's what happened. God commanded the earth to bring forth Life.
 
I always take explanations of natural life from a book with talking animals and goats that acquire spots by breeding next to carved sticks.
 
Learner said:
I agree, it doesn't weaken evolution. Evolution is more credible in comparison to abiogensis. Abiogensis in regards to this discussion, IS the alternative counter-explanation to Aesthetes and theists explanation: It ddn't happen naturally, it was God who made life.
Click to expand...

What is the difference between something happening naturally and something happening unnaturally?

Wiploc said:
I grew up among Christians, so I defer to Christians on this terminology: Since I don't believe in any of it, I call it all "magic."
Click to expand...

Religiously speaking, that would be called magicology. Get with the program.
 
T.G.G. Moogly said:
Learner said:
I agree, it doesn't weaken evolution. Evolution is more credible in comparison to abiogensis. Abiogensis in regards to this discussion, IS the alternative counter-explanation to Aesthetes and theists explanation: It ddn't happen naturally, it was God who made life.
Click to expand...

What is the difference between something happening naturally and something happening unnaturally?
Click to expand...

Clarify the argument please, natural, unnnatural...

Have we suddenly changed "the difference between God did it and God is not neccessary?" I would have liked to know a little more on your (plural) take on the "God not neccessary" bit.


Religiously speaking, that would be called magicology. Get with the program.
Click to expand...

:p
 
Learner said:
"the difference between God did it and God is not neccessary?"
Click to expand...
We can discuss my last submarine for 9 weeks without once mentioning god.
Buoyancy is ptretty well understood. Electricity. Generating electricity.
Using that electricity to move the ship; clean water, move the water; create air, move the air; move hydraulic oil; calculate the fire control problem for the purpose of delivering a warhead to a point in space taking into account the earth's shape, orbit, rotation, specific gravities, inconsistencies in the guidance system and weather over the target.

WHETHER OR NOT god was involved in creating the Earth, the universe, or the laws of nature that we manipulate or work within, we don't HAVE to invoke God to make the whole thing make sense.
Behe and ID proponents insist that one cannot explain life on Earth without at least one step that simply must be attributed to the direct action of a divine being, else there is an insurmountable mystery. This would make God necessary.

I'd swear we covered this bddfors....
 
Learner said:
Clarify the argument please, natural, unnnatural...

Have we suddenly changed "the difference between God did it and God is not neccessary?" I would have liked to know a little more on your (plural) take on the "God not neccessary" bit.
Click to expand...

I can't clarify because it is your claim, and I don't know what something would be if it is "not natural." You said that abiogenesis would have to be not natural. Something that is not natural is unnatural, correct?

So what would be the difference between something happening naturally and something happening unnaturally?
 
James Brown said:
Isn't everyone?

...unlike a rock which cant decide to turn itself into a living creature. #First_Cause #Aristotle
Click to expand...

"A rock deciding to turn itself into a living creature" is neither Evolution by Natural Selection nor Abiogenesis.
Click to expand...

I agree.
A rock deciding to do something is NOT natural selection or abiogenesis. And since rocks can't/dont do this we can exclude this idea from our list of available menu options.

I say God dunnit.
What do you say?
...cue quantum spookiness argument in 3...2...1
 
DBT said:
Lion IRC said:
James Brown said:
If life from non-life is impossible, how did Jehovah do it?
Click to expand...

Jehovah is not "non-life"
He is a personal being with volition.
...unlike a rock which cant decide to turn itself into a living creature. #First_Cause #Aristotle
Click to expand...

Rocks can't turn into life. The world is composed of more than rocks.
Click to expand...

But life does turn into rocks. Even happened in the bible with Lot's wife, but that was magic.

And rocks are covered with living things that eat the rocks. I spread ground up rocks on my garden and the plants eat the rocks, so rocks actually do turn into life, but not abracadabra style like in the bible stories. It's a natural geological and biological process. We all have rocks in our heads, we really do.

But none of that is natural, Learner told me so it must be true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom