Thought Experiment

[Whatsisface]

Well, yes. I agree.

Great.

It needs to be demonstrated whichever theory someone proposes.

Where do you stand on the question?

- Past eternal, perpetual motion machine? An infinite regress of Groundhog days?

Of course, in the end I don't know what's going on but what makes a certain sense to me is that time and space began at the big bang, meaning that the universe has existed for all time, but not eternal time.

- Unpredictable, unexpected, spontaneous chance? Poof. Nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing....then all of a sudden 'poof' - a big bang. For no particular reason.

No, I don't think this. I think that if the universe is natural it is necessary, it can't be down to chance. If natural, it can only act according to it's properties, and that's not down to chance but necessity. How could the universe be down to chance, or a fluke? That doesn't make sense. I think the reason there is something rather than nothing will be something far beyond our current understanding.

- Matrix simulation, Holographic universe?

I can't entertain these things seriously.

Sure. But the presuppositional atheist- the methodological skeptic - can gainsay ANY evidentiary claim purporting to show such a link.

But, we don't have any evidential claims. We have an absence of evidence connecting the universe to a God and the Romans verse seems to say, well, what else can explain all this but God? That's more a philosophical question than actual evidence.

In fact, I can't think of any reasonably confident, empirically supported scientific hypothesis which I couldn't gainsay using the exact same tactics as are used by God deniers.

I have to disagree, and I think the difference between us is down to atheists wanting evidence to a scientific standard of evidence, and theists being content with a lower standard of evidence. To you, that makes us atheists look like intransigent God deniers, but we're not. We just want solid evidence.

I will say though that if there was such evidence we'd have all heard it by now, hence I'm a strong atheist although I do leave the door open a crack to the possibility that God does does exist.

 

[CrowCross]

The history of science is full of examples of things once hard to explain that we now understand. What is your expertise in this matter that enables you to say it's impossible naturally?

The more we know, the more we find out we don't know.

So is that your justification for the Romans verse, that you think some things are impossible naturally?

It speaks of Gods handiwork and how you will disregard it. So far Romans 1 is right about you. But, you probably can't even see that.

If so, you're going to have to present more than you have so far to show it. You will have to show this is any more that an argument from personal incredulity on your part.

It's more than personal incredulity.....
"The fallacy of personal incredulity occurs when one finds a concept difficult to understand" When you find it difficult to understand God did it...you slip deeper and deeper into your own personal incredulity. Yet, you have no way how to explain how an "assembly line" of organelleand support systems could have arrived via a process of random mutations, chanceand time.

I'm afraid you don't understand, you're being ridiculous. Why would anyone know God exists but won't admit it? There's no point to it.

You tell me. You seem to be qualified to answer the question.

 

[Eightcrackers]

The more we know, the more we find out we don't know.

Correct.
But when have we ever found out that something was caused by the supernatural?

"Don't know" =/= "it's supernatural".

It speaks of Gods handiwork and how you will disregard it. So far Romans 1 is right about you.

Romans 1 also says that we know that the Bible god is real... I would love to see some confirmation of that...

 

[CrowCross]

Correct.
But when have we ever found out that something was caused by the supernatural?

"Don't know" =/= "it's supernatural".

Are you saying all there is is our 3 dimensions + time?

Romans 1 also says that we know that the Bible god is real... I would love to see some confirmation of that...

Of course you would...but, you don't seem to have ears to hear.

 

[Eightcrackers]

Are you saying all there is is our 3 dimensions + time?

Nope.
Nor am I saying there is more.

 

[CrowCross]

Nope.
Nor am I saying there is more.

Yikes...you sound stagnant.

 

[Eightcrackers]

Yikes...you sound stagnant.

I was pre-empting an attempt to demand proof that there are only 3+1 dimensions.
Because that's obviously what the question was teeing up.

 

[Whatsisface]

The more we know, the more we find out we don't know.

Agreed. But, I asked... What is your expertise in this matter that enables you to say (The Organelle) it's impossible naturally? The above doesn't address the question.

It speaks of Gods handiwork and how you will disregard it. So far Romans 1 is right about you. But, you probably can't even see that.

It may fall in to your idea of God's handiwork, but I'm after what shows it is God's handiwork. And yes, I fall into what Romans 1 says, but unless you can show that everything is God's handiwork, it remains men just saying stuff that they believe.

It's more than personal incredulity.....
"The fallacy of personal incredulity occurs when one finds a concept difficult to understand" When you find it difficult to understand God did it...you slip deeper and deeper into your own personal incredulity.

But this doesn't address my question to you about what makes you think the organelle impossible naturally.

To answer the charge against me, I don't think I'm committing the fallacy because my disbelief is based on the lack of evidence that the universe is God's handiwork. On the other hand, the evidence for evolution in general is of magnitudes greater than the meagre evidence for God

Yet, you have no way how to explain how an "assembly line" of organelleand support systems could have arrived via a process of random mutations, chanceand time.

First, as you have probably been told over and over evolution isn't just random mutations and chance. The random mutations that are favorable to survival are chosen by the natural selection of improved survivability.

Then, I'm no expert anyway, but it doesn't matter if currently we can't explain the organelle, that doesn't mean there isn't an explanation.

Thirdly, even if evolution is shown false, that's still not evidence God is responsible for the diversity life, it just means evolution isn't.

You tell me. You seem to be qualified to answer the question.

I can't because it doesn't describe me, and yet again here you are avoiding your burden of proof. You made the claim that I really do believe in God, it's your burden of proof to say why you think it.

 

[Eightcrackers]

The random mutations that are favorable to survival are chosen by the natural selection of improved survivability.

To be (very slightly) more precise, the genes that are less conducive to survival are selected against.

May seem like a distinction without a difference, but it's not - "neutral" genes (ones that have no effect on survival) propagate no less than "advantageous" ones.

 

[Whatsisface]

To be (very slightly) more precise, the genes that are less conducive to survival are selected against.

May seem like a distinction without a difference, but it's not - "neutral" genes (ones that have no effect on survival) propagate no less than "advantageous" ones.

Ok, I'm no expert.

 

[Eightcrackers]

Ok, I'm no expert.

Just in case one of the other non-experts in here pipes up with a... less polite correction.

My abiding maxim in here is give them nowt.

 

[SteveB]

Let's say three men approach, each holding an ancient tome. The first says, "God is real! The truth is in The Bible. And I have personally experienced God" The second says, "Allah is real! The truth is in The Koran. And I have personally experienced Allah." The third says, "Lord Shiva is real!" God is real! The truth is in the Vedas. And I have personally experienced Shiva"

Curious..... if this is true, then why haven't you?
Seems rather disingenuous to make such claims if you haven't actually experienced these yourself.

How would you go about figuring out which, if any, to believe?

As you haven't provided any information about them so I can, I would have to fall back on my basis...

Joh 14:23 WEB Jesus answered him, “If a man loves me, he will keep my word. My Father will love him, and we will come to him, and make our home with him.

Do you have any such things from either Islam or Shiva?

Why would someone believe the Christian but reject the Hindu and the Muslim?

By doing what Jesus said.

Joh 14:23 WEB Jesus answered him, “If a man loves me, he will keep my word. My Father will love him, and we will come to him, and make our home with him.

Unless you're not actually interested in knowing the truth regarding Jesus. In which case, you should definitely not do what Jesus said. Then you can remain ignorant about it and keep talking in circles.

 

[Lighthearted Atheist]

Then Jesus said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to Me unless the Father has granted it to him.”

So why do you think I should believe you have had personal experiences with God but the Muslim has not? His holy book has similar quotes about Allah and Mohamad - why believe yours and not theirs?

 

[Lighthearted Atheist]

The Holy Book that shows me how and why the truth and reality is known to me.

Yes - this is what the Muslim said. But why should I believe in Allah?

 

[Lighthearted Atheist]

Curious..... if this is true, then why haven't you?
Seems rather disingenuous to make such claims if you haven't actually experienced these yourself.

I make no claims. This is a thought experiment. can you explain why we should believe the Christian and the Christian and The Bible but not the Koran or the Vedas?

As you haven't provided any information about them so I can, I would have to fall back on my basis...

Joh 14:23 WEB Jesus answered him, “If a man loves me, he will keep my word. My Father will love him, and we will come to him, and make our home with him.

Do you have any such things from either Islam or Shiva?

Of course. They will not match word for word but yes - their books make all kinds of claims about knowing God.

Why believe your Bible and not their Koran and Vedas?

By doing what Jesus said.

Joh 14:23 WEB Jesus answered him, “If a man loves me, he will keep my word. My Father will love him, and we will come to him, and make our home with him.

Unless you're not actually interested in knowing the truth regarding Jesus. In which case, you should definitely not do what Jesus said. Then you can remain ignorant about it and keep talking in circles.

So...you really have no reason for choosing The Bible and rejecting the Koran and Vedas. You chose The Bible because you like it - not because you have any better evidence for The Bible then you do for the others. But because you like saying such as, "If a man loves me, he will keep my word. My Father will love him, and we will come to him, and make our home with him."

Thank you.

 

[Lighthearted Atheist]

Most likely because they too like me and the first guy have personally experienced the God of the Bible, but like me and your first guy have NOT personally experience Allah or Shiva.

How did you prove they did not have similar experiences with gods?

 

[Lighthearted Atheist]

I'd believe the one I personally experienced.

If I have multiple experiences, I would have to determine which one was deceiving me, and I think the only way would be to keep asking the true God to show me which entities were deceiving me, I don't think I could figure it out on my own.

So there is no reason to believe in Christianity until we each experience God? I have not experienced any god yet so then you must think I am right to remain an atheist until I do, yes?

And if the Hindu claims to have experienced Ganesh then you think it is right for them to believe in Ganesh?

 

[Lighthearted Atheist]

I agree with Discerner and Stiggy wiggy.

They did not really give answers beyond "I believe what I believe." They did not explain why we should believe the Bible and not the Vedas.

So - why do you believe The Bible and not the Vedas or Koran?

But I would add that you should read all of their holy books to see what each one's God is all about as well as see which one answers your prayer.

I've read them all. No one answered. So I'll remain an atheist until one of the 10,000 gods decides to reveal themselves to me.

I think that is the logical position, right?

Oh and when you pray to the Christian God, call on the name of Jesus.

I have. He is silent.

So - are you saying there is no reason to believe The Bible until you have a personal experience with God?

 

[Lighthearted Atheist]

I would suggest most people believe the one who is preaching what they heard as children. If you are told the Bible is true as a child, you believe the Christian, if you are told the Koran is true, you believe the second guy.

This is why the vast majority of theists have the same religion as the family they were raised in.

I agree. Christopher Hitchens once asked a Cardinal if he thought Christianity spread across Europe because it was true or because it was the religion of the Roman Empire and, as the Romans conquered Europe, they forced their religion on the conquered.

The Cardinal replied, "Because it is true."

Hitchens, laughing, replied "I rest my case."

 

[Lighthearted Atheist]

Three of the world's largest religions ALL agree that there is a Higher Power?

Yes. And they are in conflict. They cannot all be true. You cannot believe that Brahma created the world form the Cosmic Egg and The Garden of Eden.

So - which one - if any - should you believe?

Are all three texts true?

Hmmm.

This kind of vague musings about coincidence and pattern without any hard evidence is the stuff of conspiracy forums. Just say, "I believe The Bible and not the Koran because..."

I guess we can only speculate if such a humongous mass of peer reviewed, multiple-attestation corroborates the God hypothesis.

Can you share this mass of peer reviewed evidence? I have yet to see any empirical, peer reviewed evidence for God that I could not also find for Allah.

Again - hinting at mountains of evidence while supplying none is a conspiracy thing. Just share the humongous mound with us - link to the museum where the evidence is.

or admit that you really have no reason to believe The Bible over the others beyond your fondness for Christianity.