(January 4, 2015 at 11:44 am)Brian37 Wrote:

(January 4, 2015 at 11:33 am)Chili Wrote: But the universe does not exists or there would not be room for me to be. The universe is just empty space in the same way as eternity is empty time that is not known until I get there and then will be the continuity of infinity.

---

I think you have that just backwards because humans only think they are.

Wrong.

First off when you debate atheists you really need to understand that this is not our first rodeo. I myself have been debating religion online on an almost daily basis for past 14 years.

Secondly, you fail to consider that if atheists say there is no god, then it should stand to reason that humans cannot be gods either.

Gods do not exist and humans are not gods either.

Just like if I said "invisible pink unicorns do not exist" humans could not be invisible pink unicorns either.

Thanks, but I never said that humans are God, and in fact hold that humans are the reason why God is the stranger in us that we do not know. By human here I am pointing at our earthly condition in which we only think we are and that is why the prefix hu- was added to the lost image as "man" that was prior to the add-on in which humans only think they are. To note here is that hu- is from humi- to identify our earthliness as a condition added on.

And correct, I know what invisible is, what pink is and I know what unicorns are, and God is not the combination of these three or they would also be.

(January 4, 2015 at 8:11 am)BlackMason Wrote: Someone here gave us a Matt Dillahunty explanation about the necessity of contrasting nature to determine design. So I'm not gonna write on that. Instead I want to make an argument against the teleology of nature.

1) Nature has goals or nature does not have goals.
2) There have been many creatures that have come into existence.
3) There have been many creatures that have since become extinct.
4) Extinction has no purpose.

Therefore nature has no goals.

I rather like that. But much as I enjoy Matt Dillahunty, I think it fails on premise number four. Many design processes create either prototypes, or waste either by accident or as a necessary part of the process. Even human directed evolution often results in failed or intermediary progeny which are then killed or not allowed to breed. So I can certainly imagine that extinction could have a purpose. It could be the destruction an intermediary step, destruction of a prototype, or a necessary waste product.

(January 4, 2015 at 12:20 pm)Chili Wrote:

(January 4, 2015 at 11:44 am)Brian37 Wrote: Wrong.

First off when you debate atheists you really need to understand that this is not our first rodeo. I myself have been debating religion online on an almost daily basis for past 14 years.

Secondly, you fail to consider that if atheists say there is no god, then it should stand to reason that humans cannot be gods either.

Gods do not exist and humans are not gods either.

Just like if I said "invisible pink unicorns do not exist" humans could not be invisible pink unicorns either.

Thanks, but never said that humans are God, and in fact hold that humans are the reason why God is the stranger in us that we do not know. By human here I am pointing at our earthly condition in which we only think we are and that is why the prefix hu- was added to the lost image as "man" that was prior to the add-on in which humans only think they are. To note here is that hu- is from humi- to identify our earthliness as a condition added on.

And correct, I know what invisible is, what pink is and I know what unicorns are, and God is not the combination of these three or they would also be.

This garbage is the same old crap re dressed argument of "God is mysterious".

No, god is a product of human imagination. No mystery.

(January 4, 2015 at 12:15 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Um no, in the end our species will go extinct, our planet will die, our sun as well and the universe will continue on without any record of our existence.

This is an interesting line and is something that I have never heard. I will not say yes or no, because also how planets came to be has never been of interest for me.

So is there basis for what you are saying here?

(January 4, 2015 at 12:37 pm)Chili Wrote:

(January 4, 2015 at 12:15 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Um no, in the end our species will go extinct, our planet will die, our sun as well and the universe will continue on without any record of our existence.

This is an interesting line and is something that I have never heard. I will not say yes or no, because also how planets came to be has never been of interest for me.

So is there basis for what you are saying here?

The life cycle of suns is well known.

The sun our planet orbits will become a red giant and engulf earth so our planet will die.

97% of all life that has ever existed is now extinct. our species is a particularly careless one actively ruining its own environment and developing weapons that could kill all higher life, also the threats of super volcanoes and asteroids has not gone away so the odds are against us.

Evolution has also not ended, at some point Homo Sapien will cease to be and be replaced by whatever we have evolved into if we survive at all.

(January 4, 2015 at 2:47 am)Chili Wrote:

(January 4, 2015 at 1:56 am)Jenny A Wrote: Certainly I know love. I love and am loved and I see others love and be loved. But that has nothing to do with whether there is a god.

Oops, sorry, maybe you idea of God is different then mine

I've never seen anyone provide any real evidence of a god of any sort. You want to prove yours? You should start by defining him. You theists have a number of different definitions. Usually the definition of a god you attempt to prove is much more abstract and limited than the god you believe though.

Quote:Do you know what 'first cause' means? And do you also know that it ends with 'second cause'?

Oh and yes I know about the first cause argument. It's a very old argument going back to the ancient Greeks who formulated it this way:

1. Every finite and contingent being has a cause.
2. A causal loop cannot exist.
3. A causal chain cannot be of infinite length.
4. Therefore, something that is not an effect must exist.

Thomas Aquinas is traditionally given Christian credit for it. He formulates it this way:

1. A contingent (unnecessary cosmologically speaking) being exists.
2. Every contingent being has a cause of its existence.
3. The cause of its existence must be something other than itself.
4. What causes a contingent being to exist must be either only contingent beings or at least one necessary being.
5. Contingent beings cannot cause this contingent being to exist.
6. Therefore, what causes this contingent beings to exist must contain at least one necessary being.
7. Therefore, a necessary being exists.

My biggest object to such such arguments is that they are special pleading. They assume that everything requires a cause, but then magically release god from that requirement.

Immanuel Kant rejected the idea because "causality cannot legitimately be applied beyond the realm of possible experience to a transcendent cause." In other words Kant rejected the necessity of causation as a premise.

(January 4, 2015 at 12:29 pm)Brian37 Wrote:

(January 4, 2015 at 12:20 pm)Chili Wrote: Thanks, but never said that humans are God, and in fact hold that humans are the reason why God is the stranger in us that we do not know. By human here I am pointing at our earthly condition in which we only think we are and that is why the prefix hu- was added to the lost image as "man" that was prior to the add-on in which humans only think they are. To note here is that hu- is from humi- to identify our earthliness as a condition added on.

And correct, I know what invisible is, what pink is and I know what unicorns are, and God is not the combination of these three or they would also be.

This garbage is the same old crap re dressed argument of "God is mysterious".

No, god is a product of human imagination. No mystery.

Oh and you know what? Human is opposite to woman and is why there is enmity between our left and right with a pigeon flying in between so that distance can be made between heaven and earth. This is to say that woman is equal to the heart of God in us, that in Christendom is called the Christ and therefore is God with us.
.

---

(January 4, 2015 at 12:46 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote:

(January 4, 2015 at 12:37 pm)Chili Wrote: This is an interesting line and is something that I have never heard. I will not say yes or no, because also how planets came to be has never been of interest for me.

So is there basis for what you are saying here?

The life cycle of suns is well known.

The sun our planet orbits will become a red giant and engulf earth so our planet will die.

97% of all life that has ever existed is now extinct. our species is a particularly careless one actively ruining its own environment and developing weapons that could kill all higher life, also the threats of super volcanoes and asteroids has not gone away so the odds are against us.

Evolution has also not ended, at some point Homo Sapien will cease to be and be replaced by whatever we have evolved into if we survive at all.

Thank you, all new to me.

(January 4, 2015 at 12:58 pm)Chili Wrote: Oh and you know what? Human is opposite to woman and is why there is enmity between our left and right with a pigeon flying in between so that distance can be made between heaven and earth. This is to say that woman is equal to the heart of God in us, that in Christendom is called the Christ and therefore is God with us.
.

You should really go easy on the glue or whatever it is you're taking.

(January 4, 2015 at 12:58 pm)Chili Wrote:

(January 4, 2015 at 12:46 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: The life cycle of suns is well known.

The sun our planet orbits will become a red giant and engulf earth so our planet will die.

97% of all life that has ever existed is now extinct. our species is a particularly careless one actively ruining its own environment and developing weapons that could kill all higher life, also the threats of super volcanoes and asteroids has not gone away so the odds are against us.

Evolution has also not ended, at some point Homo Sapien will cease to be and be replaced by whatever we have evolved into if we survive at all.

Thank you, all new to me.

Really this is new to you! all of it! You are going to have a hard time here if even basic stuff is outside of your learning.

(January 4, 2015 at 12:37 pm)Chili Wrote:

(January 4, 2015 at 12:15 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Um no, in the end our species will go extinct, our planet will die, our sun as well and the universe will continue on without any record of our existence.

This is an interesting line and is something that I have never heard. I will not say yes or no, because also how planets came to be has never been of interest for me.

So is there basis for what you are saying here?

Yes, it is called astrophysics. All celestial bodies, planets and suns have a birth and death.