The Problem with Christians

[Mr.wizard]

First, you're lying.
You chose god because you got used to it. By parents, teachers, or whatever... society in general. You believed there was a god.
Then, when presented with evolution, your pre-ingrained notion of god was a bit at odds with it... and your mind decided to solve the dissonance by ditching the newcomer.

Is your notion of god accepting of you lying?

While it may be true that children learn about God from parents and teachers, etc., this does not account for the atheists who come to believe that God exists. Their upbringing, society's pull notwithstanding, includes learning all the standard arguments against theism from their parents  and (let's be honest)an increasingly hostile cadre of atheist professors.

But putting that aside, why is it the case the one's notion of God is at odds with evolution? Mine isn't. The Catholic Church's isn't. You must have some bible-thumping, fundamentalist caricature in mind...

Wait a minute, you really think children who have atheist parents are being taught arguments against theism? Yes atheist parents instead of bed time stories, read their children rebuttal's to the Kalam Cosmological Argument.

[athrock]

Ya know...the last 3 or so pages of this thread is just you, AJW, special pleading.  Why are we even entertaining the world's most drawn out logical fucking fallacy?  It's ridiculous.  Sorry, but you don't get to say, "you guys have to follow ALL these scientific rules!  But my God doesn't because he's immune to all the rules!"   Logical fallacy.  Mind-set of a 4 year old.  My imaginary friend gets to do whatever he wants.  

Let's consider the 4-year old for a moment.

In your home, there are certain things that are for adults only. The liquor cabinet. The gun safe. 

The 4-year old in your home is in the same "realm" as you are, but the rules for him are different. You get to stay up late; he is in bed by eight. He has his toys, you have yours.

You may decide that He can stay up past his bedtime on special occasions and you may even give him a sip of your beer now and then. More of that when he gets older. But some things are always going to be off-limits for him.

At the same time, there may be rules that are applied equally to everyone regardless of age. We will treat one another respectfully. We will not use the "F" word. (Okay, that rule doesn't exist in your house, but this is hypothetical.)

Now, in the physical universe, there are certain laws concerning gravity, thermodynamics and so forth. God normatively obeys these laws, but he is not absolutely bound by them; he can ignore them on special occasions. We commonly refer to these events as "miracles". The definition of the word is "a surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency."

In case that seems confusing, here is an example: in the US, we normatively drive on the right hand side of the road, but if a child were to dart out into our path, it would be permissable for us to swerve into the left lane to avoid hitting the child. It is not absolutely necessary to drive on the right at all times without exception.

All that having been said, there may be absolutes which apply even to God, and I would put his respect for our free will in that category, for example.

But in sum, no, God doesn't have to follow all the rules. We do. We are not God.

[Mr.wizard]

Ya know...the last 3 or so pages of this thread is just you, AJW, special pleading.  Why are we even entertaining the world's most drawn out logical fucking fallacy?  It's ridiculous.  Sorry, but you don't get to say, "you guys have to follow ALL these scientific rules!  But my God doesn't because he's immune to all the rules!"   Logical fallacy.  Mind-set of a 4 year old.  My imaginary friend gets to do whatever he wants.  

Let's consider the 4-year old for a moment.

In your home, there are certain things that are for adults only. The liquor cabinet. The gun safe. 

The 4-year old in your home is in the same "realm" as you are, but the rules for him are different. You get to stay up late; he is in bed by eight. He has his toys, you have yours.

You may decide that He can stay up past his bedtime on special occasions and you may even give him a sip of your beer now and then. More of that when he gets older. But some things are always going to be off-limits for him.

At the same time, there may be rules that are applied equally to everyone regardless of age. We will treat one another respectfully. We will not use the "F" word. (Okay, that rule doesn't exist in your house, but this is hypothetical.)

Now, in the physical universe, there are certain laws concerning gravity, thermodynamics and so forth. God normatively obeys these laws, but he is not absolutely bound by them; he can ignore them on special occasions. We commonly refer to these events as "miracles". The definition of the word is "a surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency."

In case that seems confusing, here is an example: in the US, we normatively drive on the right hand side of the road, but if a child were to dart out into our path, it would be permissable for us to swerve into the left lane to avoid hitting the child. It is not absolutely necessary to drive on the right at all times without exception.

All that having been said, there may be absolutes which apply even to God, and I would put his respect for our free will in that category.

But in sum, no, God doesn't have to follow all the rules.

Ya, special pleading, we get it, It doesn't matter how many bad analogies you use, it's still special pleading.

[athrock]

Let's consider the 4-year old for a moment.

In your home, there are certain things that are for adults only. The liquor cabinet. The gun safe. 

The 4-year old in your home is in the same "realm" as you are, but the rules for him are different. You get to stay up late; he is in bed by eight. He has his toys, you have yours.

You may decide that He can stay up past his bedtime on special occasions and you may even give him a sip of your beer now and then. More of that when he gets older. But some things are always going to be off-limits for him.

At the same time, there may be rules that are applied equally to everyone regardless of age. We will treat one another respectfully. We will not use the "F" word. (Okay, that rule doesn't exist in your house, but this is hypothetical.)

Now, in the physical universe, there are certain laws concerning gravity, thermodynamics and so forth. God normatively obeys these laws, but he is not absolutely bound by them; he can ignore them on special occasions. We commonly refer to these events as "miracles". The definition of the word is "a surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency."

In case that seems confusing, here is an example: in the US, we normatively drive on the right hand side of the road, but if a child were to dart out into our path, it would be permissable for us to swerve into the left lane to avoid hitting the child. It is not absolutely necessary to drive on the right at all times without exception.

All that having been said, there may be absolutes which apply even to God, and I would put his respect for our free will in that category.

But in sum, no, God doesn't have to follow all the rules.

Ya, special pleading, we get it, It doesn't matter how many bad analogies you use, it's still special pleading.

Ya, just tell me where I'm wrong if my analogy is bad. 

Special pleading is defined as Special Pleading is a fallacy in which a person applies standards, principles, rules, etc. to others while taking herself (or those she has a special interest in) to be exempt, without providing adequate justification for the exemption.

Since we are not God and He is, I have provided adequate justification for the exemption.

[LadyForCamus]

Ya know...the last 3 or so pages of this thread is just you, AJW, special pleading.  Why are we even entertaining the world's most drawn out logical fucking fallacy?  It's ridiculous.  Sorry, but you don't get to say, "you guys have to follow ALL these scientific rules!  But my God doesn't because he's immune to all the rules!"   Logical fallacy.  Mind-set of a 4 year old.  My imaginary friend gets to do whatever he wants.  

Let's consider the 4-year old for a moment.

In your home, there are certain things that are for adults only. The liquor cabinet. The gun safe. 

The 4-year old in your home is in the same "realm" as you are, but the rules for him are different. You get to stay up late; he is in bed by eight. He has his toys, you have yours.

You may decide that He can stay up past his bedtime on special occasions and you may even give him a sip of your beer now and then. More of that when he gets older. But some things are always going to be off-limits for him.

At the same time, there may be rules that are applied equally to everyone regardless of age. We will treat one another respectfully. We will not use the "F" word. (Okay, that rule doesn't exist in your house, but this is hypothetical.)

Now, in the physical universe, there are certain laws concerning gravity, thermodynamics and so forth. God normatively obeys these laws, but he is not absolutely bound by them; he can ignore them on special occasions. We commonly refer to these events as "miracles". The definition of the word is "a surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency."

In case that seems confusing, here is an example: in the US, we normatively drive on the right hand side of the road, but if a child were to dart out into our path, it would be permissable for us to swerve into the left lane to avoid hitting the child. It is not absolutely necessary to drive on the right at all times without exception.

All that having been said, there may be absolutes which apply even to God, and I would put his respect for our free will in that category, for example.

But in sum, no, God doesn't have to follow all the rules. We do. We are not God.

Unfortunately, this is a failed analogy at its core. In fact, I will venture to say that no analogy can be logically applied to God. By theist's own definition God exists outside of time and space, therefore we cannot compare anything in this world to him, nor can we compare him to anything which is bound by the laws of this world. Ya know...because he isn't real.

And btw...how are miracles not a direct violation of human free will?

[Mr.wizard]

Ya, special pleading, we get it, It doesn't matter how many bad analogies you use, it's still special pleading.

Ya, just tell me where I'm wrong if my analogy is bad. 

Special pleading is defined as Special Pleading is a fallacy in which a person applies standards, principles, rules, etc. to others while taking herself (or those she has a special interest in) to be exempt, without providing adequate justification for the exemption.

Since we are not God and He is, I have provided adequate justification for the exemption.

Because you haven't established that god even exists, let alone be able to tell us what rules he's made or has to follow. Your comparing things we know exist with something we have no knowledge of, your just making up god to fit your analogies.

That wasn't really the point anyway, the point was special pleading.

[pocaracas]

First, you're lying.
You chose god because you got used to it. By parents, teachers, or whatever... society in general. You believed there was a god.
Then, when presented with evolution, your pre-ingrained notion of god was a bit at odds with it... and your mind decided to solve the dissonance by ditching the newcomer.

The same argument can be used against you. The entire education system in the west has been taken over by pro-evolutionists. It's extremely difficult, if not impossible to get a teaching position in a biology department anywhere unless you tow the pro-evolution line. Your pre-ingrained education and desire to be the master of your own destiny prohibits you from even considering the existence of God.

You're trying to compare two completely different things.
The education system that relies on science has tons of evidence behind it.
From Newtonian physics, to chemistry, to quantum mechanics, to biology, to engineering, etc, etc. They all paint a coherent picture. One that requires no god. One where no god is apparent.
Why should a god be inserted where none has shown to be?

Also amino-acids have been seen to self assemble for decades.... amino-acids can then form into proteins with a far far better chance than your numbers have been suggesting.

Citation?

enjoy:
https://scholar.google.pt/scholar?q=self...kQgQMIGjAA

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK22421/

Maybe you prefer a simple video? (haha.. can't get to the end... need to register... too bad)
http://study.com/academy/lesson/how-amin...otein.html

[pocaracas]

First, you're lying.
You chose god because you got used to it. By parents, teachers, or whatever... society in general. You believed there was a god.
Then, when presented with evolution, your pre-ingrained notion of god was a bit at odds with it... and your mind decided to solve the dissonance by ditching the newcomer.

Is your notion of god accepting of you lying?

While it may be true that children learn about God from parents and teachers, etc., this does not account for the atheists who come to believe that God exists. Their upbringing, society's pull notwithstanding, includes learning all the standard arguments against theism from their parents  and (let's be honest)an increasingly hostile cadre of atheist professors.

The great majority believe due to childhood indoctrination.
Others due to societal pressures.
Others due to blank sheet impressed by some traumatic event in their lives.
And there are many other reasons... but the main gist is: if that bulk of indoctrinated people didn't exist, the others would very likely not follow suit so easily.
Hence, indoctrination seems to be the main cause for all believers, even if indirectly.

But putting that aside, why is it the case the one's notion of God is at odds with evolution? Mine isn't. The Catholic Church's isn't. You must have some bible-thumping, fundamentalist caricature in mind...

I don't know why it is put at odds.... it seems AAA and AJ think it it does and are here trying their darnest to discredit evolution, so they can shoehorn their pet imaginary friend as the cause of it all, in a clear god-of-the-gaps fashion.

I think I pointed that out right on the first or second day that AJ was here on the forum... but it still hasn't made it into his brain.... maybe I was ineffective at conveying the futility of that line of reasoning...

[robvalue]

I've been doing some cutting edge research. I have finally discovered what it means to be "outside of time". This opens up the possibility of God, after all.

Viewer discretion is advised: not everyone will be able to handle this:

---

http://youtu.be/BU7zMB5BWkw

---

[athrock]

Let's consider the 4-year old for a moment.

In your home, there are certain things that are for adults only. The liquor cabinet. The gun safe. 

The 4-year old in your home is in the same "realm" as you are, but the rules for him are different. You get to stay up late; he is in bed by eight. He has his toys, you have yours.

You may decide that He can stay up past his bedtime on special occasions and you may even give him a sip of your beer now and then. More of that when he gets older. But some things are always going to be off-limits for him.

At the same time, there may be rules that are applied equally to everyone regardless of age. We will treat one another respectfully. We will not use the "F" word. (Okay, that rule doesn't exist in your house, but this is hypothetical.)

Now, in the physical universe, there are certain laws concerning gravity, thermodynamics and so forth. God normatively obeys these laws, but he is not absolutely bound by them; he can ignore them on special occasions. We commonly refer to these events as "miracles". The definition of the word is "a surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency."

In case that seems confusing, here is an example: in the US, we normatively drive on the right hand side of the road, but if a child were to dart out into our path, it would be permissable for us to swerve into the left lane to avoid hitting the child. It is not absolutely necessary to drive on the right at all times without exception.

All that having been said, there may be absolutes which apply even to God, and I would put his respect for our free will in that category, for example.

But in sum, no, God doesn't have to follow all the rules. We do. We are not God.

Unfortunately, this is a failed analogy at its core.  In fact, I will venture to say that no analogy can be logically applied to God.  By theist's own definition God exists outside of time and space, therefore we cannot compare anything in this world to him, nor can we compare him to anything which is bound by the laws of this world.  Ya know...because he isn't real.

Can you prove this? You know...prove a negative?

And btw...how are miracles not a direct violation of human free will?

How does parting the Red Sea violate anyone's free will? Or leaving an image on the Shroud of Turin?

These are signs of God's action, but people still reject them. No one is forced to believe because of miracles.