(September 20, 2011 at 5:59 am)ElDinero Wrote: Instinct is not an alternative to evolution. Instinct is evolved.

Some proof?

All natural life is a product of evolution. Animals that failed to act within their instincts would have died out. If you're suggesting something put it there, then it's you that needs to provide the proof.

---

Furthermore, animals we are most similar to exhibit the same instincts. The behaviour of infant humans is very similar to the behaviour of infant monkeys.

(September 20, 2011 at 7:09 am)ElDinero Wrote: I would not agree those are fine standards. Love, like respect, is earned, so God would have to earn my love. I do not love my enemies, that is stupid. My enemies are people who would exploit the weak for their own gain, so no, I don't love them. They can fuck off.

Yes, it is so sad that you think love have to be earned. You have children?

Quote:And as with every single other Christian, you've cherry picked which bits of the Bible you want to represent YOUR Christianity. Jesus said he came 'not to bring peace, but to bring a sword'. Would that be the same as loving thine enemy?

In actual fact yes. It does state that your enemies may even be those from your own household. It does not imply revenge or anything of the kind.

Quote:I don't need to go back to the barbaric commandments of your God, pre-Christ, to find shitty stuff. There's plenty of crap messages in the New Testament, spoken by your 'saviour' that not only aren't good, but you ignore completely in favour of four passages that sum up how you want to view your religion.

You are welcome to raise those, but please use it in context.

Quote:We do not deserve eternal damnation for minor transgressions. And I don't believe in the concept of sin anyway, nor that any of the seven deadly sins are necessarily bad. I don't really think anyone deserves eternal damnation. It's easy to ignore the seriousness of such sins when they're stupid, and ignore the holiness of God when there's no reason to think he exists. What a sad picture of people you have, it's fairly pathetic. Waking up in the morning hating yourself, thinking the best you deserve is to be flogged and tortured for the rest of time.

It seems to be a fairly general misconception that real Christians have a poor image of themselves. Humility is quite far removed form a poor self image.
Consider for a moment a transgressor of any law of the land. Does the fact that he knows he is guilty and deserving of punishment now make him this self-hating person?
But consider that you know what the punishment is - it has been clearly spelt out - you cannot claim either ignorance or unfairness.
But that is not the purpose of the discussion - to start with accusations, but rather to put points across - whether accepted or not.
Your suggestion that there is insufficient reason to believe that God exists, is a statement that you cannot back up. To the contrary, even Dawkins admitted that there must be some intelligence - although he contributed it to some weird aliens (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoncJBrrdQ8)
Apart from creation, you are welcome to explore the prophecies in the Bible that very accurately descibes future events. The claim that these were recorded after the event is easily dismissed by intelligent study.
The problem is not the facts. The problem is God, whom you presently seemingly reject

Oh dear, oh dear. You've used a clip from the utterly discredited, libellous propaganda movie Expelled to make any kind of point whatsoever. Dawkins did not say anything of the sort - did you watch the clip? Ben Stein asked him for any way in which intelligence could have led to life on this planet. The point he is making is a hypothetical way in which intelligence could have designed life and seeded onto Earth. He does not believe that is what happened or that there must be some kind of intelligence, you moron.

Of course I can back up the statement that there is insufficient evidence to believe in God. Don't be so fucking absurd.

I think my brain is going to explode... I don't mean to be rude, but can anyone actually have thought processes like this guy?

Humillity is also owning up to just how good you ae at something Carn. No to do so is against your god and is a lie =ergo a sin?

(September 19, 2011 at 8:58 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: I must be losing it,

What gives you the impression you ever had it to lose?

(September 20, 2011 at 7:54 am)ElDinero Wrote: Oh dear, oh dear. You've used a clip from the utterly discredited, libellous propaganda movie Expelled to make any kind of point whatsoever. Dawkins did not say anything of the sort - did you watch the clip? Ben Stein asked him for any way in which intelligence could have led to life on this planet. The point he is making is a hypothetical way in which intelligence could have designed life and seeded onto Earth. He does not believe that is what happened or that there must be some kind of intelligence, you moron.

Of course I can back up the statement that there is insufficient evidence to believe in God. Don't be so fucking absurd.

Yes, as he cannot explain how it happened in the first place and thus proposed a really, really ridiculous alternative. He implicated some form of intelligence - hence the rather absurd alternative. The reason being that intelligence seem to be involved.
There has been no, but no, even experimental success to support the theory that life started by itself from non-living material. Hypotheses have been formulated, but no success creating a living, even less a self-replicating living organism and even less that replication from such an organism actually took place. Even a cursory examination of available information will reveal that to an honest student. So it must rely on a chance that is so small that it would be less than one in the total number of particles in the universe. But that is what is called "science" for you!
I will be happy to receive conclusive proof that there is insufficient reason to believe that God exists. You cannot.
Your rather foul language actually does not support the notion that atheists may be kind and generous beings. So, I was possibly wrong in my assumption in this respect.
I do not mean to be disrespectful, but let us be cordial in discussion. Anger suggests you are losing it.

Swearing does not = anger. If you're going to act like a dickhead and post videos from a discredited propaganda movie and misrepresent what the people in it are saying, I'll treat you with the same respect you're treating me: None.

Conclusive proof that there is insufficient reason to believe that God exists? This is being done backwards. Do you also want conclusive proof that there is insufficient reason to believe that leprechauns exist?

Backing up my statement that there isn't sufficient evidence: The evidence that has been presented has been shown to be spurious, presuppositional, circular, fraudulent or absent. Your criticism of science's inability to recreate the beginning of life is irrelevant. Just because we haven't YET been able to show it being done, does not mean it didn't happen, and certainly doesn't mean God did it. This is a classic God of the Gaps argument, and it doesn't impress me. We're filling in the gaps all the time, but it'll never be enough until arseholes like you have been provided with a video documenting the start of the universe.

Even that wouldn't be enough. lol