Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Too soon. Why anyone would allow themselves to be convinced of anything by something they read on a discussion forum is beyond me. Not to mention the fact that it's really scary to acknowledge how often it must happen!
Can only express my own opinion about such things of course, but may I not also ask if we should not allow ourselves to be convinced of anything regardless the source? As long as we are convinced for good reason? Why not allow ourselves to be convinced of what others think, explain, reason?
I see it quite the opposite than you do, because I have noted for a very long time now how very rarely it happens, for reasons I've also touched upon before. Reason, logic and objective thinking take a very back seat to our emotions and confirmation bias such that no one changes their mind about anything of consequence once we get past a certain age, in this forum or most other places where people discuss these kinds of differences.
Yes, some rare exceptions to the rule, but the rule holds pretty solidly no matter.
No. If He cares He would do something about it. Otherwise He would not be God. If He doesn't do anything about it it's assuredly because He doesn't care. One suspicion I have is that if there truly is another dimension, a spiritual one, then this God inhabits it wholly and isn't even aware of what's happening down here. If He is aware of what is going on down here, then we are back to the idea of "How could a God possibly stand idly by and watch little children being tortured and not intervene?" Two possibilities by my reckoning: either He deliberately shuts off any feelings about it like a spigot in order to respect the natural laws He put in place, or He simply doesn't care. It doesn't touch Him. I go with either one, but favor the latter.
How would a god 'not care', when the entire point by which man created a god was to experience hope/support re: death, illness and morality based in fear? It wouldn't serve the purpose for which he was created.
What atheist saying is that? “I have no solid worldview of my own”?
"'tis Unutterable". To translate from English to Theist, "We cannot Utter it'.
And to translate: “I have no solid worldview of my own”? into English; we do not have Dogmas. claimed to be unalterable, so they have to be altered slowly hoping the people don't notice that Christian doctrine and ethics had to be changes to keep pace with humanism or be Left behind" (this may seem rather longer but it takes less time to utter bullcrap than to pick it to pieces and show that bullcrap is what it is.
see Arq Axiom no. 7 'It takes less time to say: "There are fairies at the bottom of my garden" than to explain why there probably aren't'.
No. If He cares He would do something about it. Otherwise He would not be God. If He doesn't do anything about it it's assuredly because He doesn't care. One suspicion I have is that if there truly is another dimension, a spiritual one, then this God inhabits it wholly and isn't even aware of what's happening down here. If He is aware of what is going on down here, then we are back to the idea of "How could a God possibly stand idly by and watch little children being tortured and not intervene?" Two possibilities by my reckoning: either He deliberately shuts off any feelings about it like a spigot in order to respect the natural laws He put in place, or He simply doesn't care. It doesn't touch Him. I go with either one, but favor the latter.
There is the other option that makes a whole lot more sense to me all considered; no God in the first place.
Got to thinking about your rationale that has you believing in one and beside the fact that we interpret what we don't understand quite differently, I got to thinking about the implications of your reason and logic a bit further.
If we conclude the existence of God or an intelligent supernatural being, because we don't understand something about our natural world, where does that leave scientific inquiry? Take the genome which we both agree is impressive and complex. Not too long ago we had no idea what it was. What if back then the conclusion was we can't understand what it is, so it must be God. Would we or should we have pursued understanding the genome better like we eventually did?
If I'm understanding you correctly, and we assume God exists because we don't understand something, then you are thinking we never will. Right? So why bother figuring out what in your opinion can't be known? Why continue with scientific discovery about what we don't yet understand?
Conclusion?
Stop with scientific study and just accept what we don't understand is God's doing? Or continue working on what we don't yet understand but someday will? If the latter, then why default on believing in God simply because we don't understand some things going on around us that eventually we will?
I well remember you explaining your opinion is "not factual in any way," but the rationale is interesting to further consider in terms of these implications that obviously follow. Perhaps for someone with opinion based on more in the way of facts to consider and comment upon. If I might be missing something...
... James Tour has credentials far beyond any of us on this forum and this is what he has to say about the origin of life. Especially interesting are his comments about time working against the process.
So what exactly are James Tour's credentials on the origins of life?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iwasmadenew
You claim no one is hand-waving, then you go on to do just that...
“Time working against the process? That alone is enough to NOT watch your video.
Your Discovery Institute video is refuted by 1) being a Discovery Institute video,...”
Your eagerness to dismiss information based the source of that information is not a trait of a logical thinker.
Your English is fine, your reasoning is infantile. I feel sorry for you. You’re a troubled individual who seems desperate to convince yourself that God doesn’t exist. You’ll learn the truth one day.
I'm going to just let this one go past. It's funny that infantile reasoning should be mentioned though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iwasmadenew
To assume your understanding of evolution is better than that of James Tour is monumentally delusional.
James Tour is a creationist. Need I say more? He's a very intelligent man, to be sure but I question his 'understanding' of evolution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
You should either stop psychoanalyzing people you've never met, or willingly submit to the psychoanalyzing that we atheists do. Which is it going to be?
If his "reasoning is infantile", what is keeping secret files on other posters?
Can only express my own opinion about such things of course, but may I not also ask if we should not allow ourselves to be convinced of anything regardless the source? As long as we are convinced for good reason? Why not allow ourselves to be convinced of what others think, explain, reason?
A very articulate and persuasive person is not necessarily correct in what he thinks. That's why.
No. If He cares He would do something about it. Otherwise He would not be God. If He doesn't do anything about it it's assuredly because He doesn't care. One suspicion I have is that if there truly is another dimension, a spiritual one, then this God inhabits it wholly and isn't even aware of what's happening down here. If He is aware of what is going on down here, then we are back to the idea of "How could a God possibly stand idly by and watch little children being tortured and not intervene?" Two possibilities by my reckoning: either He deliberately shuts off any feelings about it like a spigot in order to respect the natural laws He put in place, or He simply doesn't care. It doesn't touch Him. I go with either one, but favor the latter.
There is the other option that makes a whole lot more sense to me all considered; no God in the first place.
Got to thinking about your rationale that has you believing in one and beside the fact that we interpret what we don't understand quite differently, I got to thinking about the implications of your reason and logic a bit further.
If we conclude the existence of God or an intelligent supernatural being, because we don't understand something about our natural world, where does that leave scientific inquiry? Take the genome which we both agree is impressive and complex. Not too long ago we had no idea what it was. What if back then the conclusion was we can't understand what it is, so it must be God. Would we or should we have pursued understanding the genome better like we eventually did?
If I'm understanding you correctly, and we assume God exists because we don't understand something, then you are thinking we never will. Right? So why bother figuring out what in your opinion can't be known? Why continue with scientific discovery about what we don't yet understand?
Conclusion?
Stop with scientific study and just accept what we don't understand is God's doing? Or continue working on what we don't yet understand but someday will? If the latter, then why default on believing in God simply because we don't understand some things going on around us that eventually we will?
I well remember you explaining your opinion is "not factual in any way," but the rationale is interesting to further consider in terms of these implications that obviously follow. Perhaps for someone with opinion based on more in the way of facts to consider and comment upon. If I might be missing something...
What you are missing is that even IF we determine HOW everything works we will still not know WHAT it is or WHY.
There is the other option that makes a whole lot more sense to me all considered; no God in the first place.
nipped for space ...
I well remember you explaining your opinion is "not factual in any way," but the rationale is interesting to further consider in terms of these implications that obviously follow. Perhaps for someone with opinion based on more in the way of facts to consider and comment upon. If I might be missing something...
thats right. don't start off with god.
Start with ... its clear we are in a larger more complex system. That is scientifically demonstrated today.
so now what do we do when evaluating what people are saying?
ignore the most scientifically supported starting point and assume nothing? assume deity?
No. If He cares He would do something about it. Otherwise He would not be God. If He doesn't do anything about it it's assuredly because He doesn't care. One suspicion I have is that if there truly is another dimension, a spiritual one, then this God inhabits it wholly and isn't even aware of what's happening down here. If He is aware of what is going on down here, then we are back to the idea of "How could a God possibly stand idly by and watch little children being tortured and not intervene?" Two possibilities by my reckoning: either He deliberately shuts off any feelings about it like a spigot in order to respect the natural laws He put in place, or He simply doesn't care. It doesn't touch Him. I go with either one, but favor the latter.
yes, that is where we disagree. I say god is whatever god is and not what some people people say it is. I say, that what it is, probably fits what see better than what we want it to be.
so again, I am left in the middle
1) only loving all powerful
2) only evil all powerful
3) something in-between
4) nothing. We are not in a larger more complex system.
5) deny everything because we are out to stop religion in the states.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why anyone would allow themselves to be convinced of anything by something they read on a discussion forum is beyond me. Not to mention the fact that it's really scary to acknowledge how often it must happen!
