the god created science argument

[Epimethean]

" ... but the point is that He doesn't need to openly demonstrate His power to reach people. The number of Christians in the world speak to that."

Are the 8,000,000 cancer patients in the world also evidence of his power in reaching people? If so, we need to chemo the fucker out of this universe. You love citing numbers that can mean nothing except circumstance: Stupid exists and grows. It can be cured, but not by any tool religion offers. Science is the cure.

[lucent]

The first three, even assuming they happened at all, can easily be attributed to coincidence, confirmation bias and hallucination. The fourth is a claim that might be objectively verified but hasn't been.

No, they can't be easily dismissed. Dismiss this guys testimony:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7dpGWYZMDc

The number of Christians in the world do not require a divine or other magical explanation. The number can be explained by human efforts. It was humans, not God, who wrote the Bible. It was humans, not God who carried the book and brought copies all over the world. It was humans, not God who built churches. No divine hand is necessary to explain any of it. Also, argument from popularity is not evidence, it's fallacious reasoning.

No, this is fallacious reasoning. You've presumed the existence of my God and all that comes with Him. Which means the bible is true and divinely inspired. Which means that the Holy Spirit built up the church. So to try and explain it any other way is ridiculous.

Who hasn't been seen in 2000 years, and I can't even find any accounts of that life outside of Christian mythology. If Jesus really did live, he was apparently not noteworthy to anyone who lived at that time outside of his band of followers. It's not until the 2nd century that there is any outside historical accounts and even these are brief and oblique.

He has seen by plenty of people in the last 2000 years. There are also 1st century accounts. The historicity of Jesus is better attested to than many historical figures whose existence I'm sure you take for granted.

http://www.westarkchurchofchrist.org/lib...blical.htm

OK, a bit of friendly advice, don't try to argue that you know someone who you've exchanged posts with on the internet better than they know themselves. It is neither convincing to the person you address nor is it likely to impress anyone who observes.

I'm sorry I jumped to the conclusion that you didn't want to know God on the basis that you were mocking and denigrating Him. My bad.

Beyond the fact that this is a total misrepresentation of what I wrote, I can't help but note that "pond scum" is still better than worthless sinner unworthy of love or forgiveness who deserves eternal torture.

Actually, I would say pond scum is a step up from bacteria.

Why do you think Jesus went to the cross? It was precisely for the love and forgiveness of sinners.

Yahweh had spoken with each one of these people. This is not faith any more than you need faith to know that someone you know really exists. This brings me back to my original point. Why has Yahweh gotten so shy lately?

This is why my faith is reasoned, because I know He really exists. I have faith in who He is and what He said He would do. And again, He hasn't gotten shy. As I said, there are two billion Christians in the world. This is not evidence of shyness.

(Translation: You annoying skeptics keep asking for evidence but you should just take our word for it or you'll be sorry)

I'm not impressed.

Neither am I impressed by willful ignorance. To think ignorance is wise is foolishness. To say there is no truth means you have no truth in you. If you were a true skeptic you would be skeptical of your skepticism. You know there is a God, so how wise can confucious or buddha or even data be? There is a truth: There is a God.

First, I've yet to see any "reasons" for your faith. Second, my "blind faith" as you call it is a belief in a fantastic natural universe (which really does exist) and some wonder about a mysterious mind behind it. While the latter isn't proven, my spirituality is still grounded in the natural world. You on the other hand, not only posit that a creator exists but that you know the mind of it, have a personal relationship with it and know what it wants and hates.

So you worship the creation instead of the creator..that's fairly common and mostly pagan. That's what idolatry is, just so you know. So you recognize you have a spirit, but don't acknowledge where it came from. Basically, a deist is an atheist who is intellectually honest enough to recogize this:

Romans 1:20

For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

So, you know you have a spirit so you can't deny there is a God. Yet, you still deny who He is. You prefer to believe in a God that does nothing for you and requires nothing of you. You think his Universe is amazing if He isn't directly involved. It doesn't matter what's going on on Earth..you can excuse it because he just isnt powerful enough to do anything, or he is so beyond us that we are nothing to him. Thats all fine.. But! If He is personally involved then obviously He is very terrible and evil and should be put on trial. Same Universe and everything. If He leaves you here to rot you say Bang up job God! If He is personally involved in your life you say Crucify Him! Pretty interesting contrast, don't you think?

If you say so but I find that story implausible to say the least. "Hey, it says here in this book that God the Father had to send his son who was also himself as God the Son down to earth to bleed on a cross because this cruel sacrifice was the only way that he could convince himself to forgive us all for being such sinful beings which we are because one of my ancestors (who lived 6000 years ago at the dawn of time but after the Sumerians entered the Bronze Age) who was made from a rib ate a magic fruit after speaking with a talking snake and anyone who doesn't believe this story will be tortured forever by the god who loves us so much. Oh, and love is evil when the body parts are similar. Makes perfect sense to me. It's what I'd suspected all along."

I didn't know what was in the bible when I got to it. God had confirmed certain things to me so that when I read it I knew it was about Him. As far as your narrative goes, again you are showing poor knowledge of theology. The Father and the Son are two different people..He wasn't sending Himself. I am really encouraging you to please make an attempt to understand the theology of Christianity before you attempt to criticize it.

Compare the accomplishments of science in the last 300 years to what Christianity did for the 1200 years prior.

I don't make any apologies for the catholic church. It is a pagan institution with Christianity tacked on. The pope is a type of antichrist. Do you realize how many millions of Christians the catholics killed during the inquisition?

As far as science goes, it really got its start in Christian Europe, and some of the greatest scientists, who made the most monumental discoveries were Christians. Christians who were deeply faithful. The modern father of the scientific method was Sir Francis Bacon, a Christian. So, in actuality, science has a lot to owe to Christianity. It was only thought the Universe could be studied because God created a rational Universe based on the rule of law.

Or powerful enough to get the ball rolling, which doesn't necessarily indicate omniscient, omnipresent or omnibenevolant. How can we expect such a being to relate to us? And if It does, I see no reason to think so. If I'm wrong, God can contact me any time. Live to serve ya God but please do it in front of many witnesses who can verify that they heard it too and I'm not crazy.

Any being which could create this Universe possesses power and intellect beyond our comprehension. The Creator of the Universe deserves an enormous berth as far as capability and capacity goes. There is no reason to think he couldn't have the attributes the bible describes Him to have.

What do you base this assertion on? I think the size and time scale of the universe are humbling enough to speculate that if I were to stand next to God, It would not even be aware of my presence.

An unlimited being..isn't limited. How we square up to Him has no bearing on what He thinks about us, or our level of importance to Him. How do you know life isn't the most precious thing to Him there is?

You see, I can skate by the problem of evil by saying clearly God is not perfect, not omnipotent, not aware of our individual plight, who still gave us reason and an indomitable spirit that we can triumph over adversity and build on the foundation we are given. God did the best It could and the rest is up to us. God begs our pardon but never promised us a rose garden.

In other words, you can construct a God of your personal preference which is imprevious to criticism. Again, just look at the contrast. You actually respect the God that left you in this mess and will let you die without ever knowning any real truth..but you don't respect the God who loves you personally and is extending His hand to you at this very moment.

Your god, on the other hand, has a lot of explaining to do. Forget the tsunamis, earthquakes and plagues. Forget the evil we do to one another in life. Just focus only on the atrocities that his churches, both Catholic and Protestant, did in his name. If Jesus is who Christians say he is, it means he watched the Inquisition, the burning of Witches, the Crusades, the modern televangelists making money off the poor and gullible, the bigotry and persecution done in his name. And he did nothing to stop any of it. He couldn't even be bothered to ensure that his church was an example for the rest of us to live up to. If Jesus is real, he is the least fit being in all the universe to sit in judgment over anyone. It is he who should beg our forgiveness and not the other way around.

You're quite wrong about who owes who. God gave us a perfect world and humanity trashed it. God gives us all life, and the opportunity to know Him and have eternal life. Humanity has spit in His face every step of the way. We killed all of his prophets and crucified our Messiah. We have the world that we created, and it is the one we deserve. Our sinful nature is what is responsible, and the world is a reflection of how true that is.

He allows evil, because he allows for human beings to have a choice. If He preprogrammed human beings only to do good, they would be mere robots. Free will requires the option to choose evil. This is the proving ground for eternal life, and what we do here determines our eternal future. The evil we have in world today is due to mankind. God isn't going to erase our responsibility by zapping it away. However, God is restraining the evil in this world. What we see today is just the barest shred of how terrible it could be if God wasn't restraining it. He is undoing the damage that we do to one another twenty four hours a day. God doesn't owe us anything. If we had done what He told us to do there wouldn't any evil in the world at all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rfd_1UAjeIA

I have touched some people's lives and made them better. Just to give one example, I'll never forget how my wife once look up at me from the hospital bed and told me she couldn't have made it without me. I have saved a failing business and kept people employeed. My employees are making better money and working in a less hostile work environment since getting rid of a certain middle manager. Sure, I've made a lot of mistakes too but I've found my meaning in trying to make my own little corner of Creation a little better. This is where we find meaning, that when we inevitably leave this world, that it is better for having known us. This kind of monument to God is far superior to all the sung hymns and constructed churches. And if God is never aware, the results are real all the same. It needs no validation from us and we don't from It.

That's how an atheist finds meaning. For all you know, you could have made the world quantifiably worse. To derive your meaning from this is completely trite when you understand there is a creator. He is the one who holds the real answers and the real meaning. You know there is a God, but you still don't mind living and dying in his fishbowl. And when he turns off the Universe when he gets bored, what difference will it make? Maybe there will be a notation in his log. "On this day, watching creatures live and die stopped being exciting. cancelled experiment."

And we're back to why isn't this "personal" god of yours making himself known. In a real way, not by dreams and beliefs. The way this god supposedly did in the Bible.

We're back to your fallacy of presupposing Gods existence and denying it in the same breath. Dreams and visions are a real way, btw.

All evidence to the contrary. Either God doesn't exist or isn't aware. It's you who have some explaining to do.

The evidence is in your own life:

James 1:17

Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.

It's you who have some explaining to do.

[lucent]

I consider God to be a self-evident truth, which can be proven by reason alone; it is axiomatic. As far as physical evidence, once it is established that God exists, the entire creation is evidence for the existence of God. There is no lack of evidence. Logic necessitates a first cause. Ontologically, our thought of a perfect Creator necessitates His existence. There is the argument from morality, the argument from design, the cosmological argument..etc. From there, we can identify who God is.

You can make certain presumptions for argumentation so we don't have to tediously examine the same topics over and over again. So, set your terms as to what you are going to argue and I will provide a counter argument.

It doesn't matter what you hypothesize, and as long as all you have is an opinion you have no grounds to dismiss similar flights of fancy from others who happen to disagree. In other words, you don't get to decide the grounds or terms of an argument that you put forward. I can make up any god I like at will, but having a discussion over what this god did, does, or desires, without first providing any evidence that said god exists is infantile. Without something to consider, we're talking Santa Claus, Unicorns, Teapots, and Garden Faeries. There's a word for any "test" like this, false positive.

You're defining things in a way that suits your argument without providing any justification for your definitions. It's common, it's bullshit, that's apologetics. Propose the deists god and we'll just have to wait until we can see the beginning of the beginning, but as long as you put forward a theistic god, that interacts with the world, you're making a claim to the material, and with claims like that, it's evidence or gtfo. That modern christians seem to know so little about their own theology that they fail to realize that their religion is grounded on "evidence" in the first place, and that there was no distinction between the natural and the supernatural worlds to the founders minds is utterly lost on them. We know too much to believe in these fairy tales as told and so we try to beat them out against the anvil of that knowledge and make them fit. They don't. They're relics. God isn't shy, people just aren't as gullible as before. Billions of people are neither lying nor correct, they are mislead. But hey, don't let me steal your dichotomy away from you, there isn't much left to christianity without them.

---

You could say it was probably pretty stupid to test something you had a hunch could burn off the entire atmosphere, but that's what they did in 1945 when they tested the atomic bomb. Luckily for us, science wasn't wrong that day.

Science, has created enough weapons to destroy this world 2000 times over, and the only thing atheists can hope for is that cooler heads prevail. History has shown this is inevitably not the case. I'll give you a doomsday scenerio:

It is true that technology is getting expodentially more powerful, cheaper to produce, and more widely available. According to this, it is inevitable that eventually a doomsday weapon will be created that anyone in the world could replicate in their own homes, in secret, and use it to set off a chain reaction that triggers world war 3.

Now the religious belief that science can save us is called scientism. Science is a philosophical discipline based on the epistimological belief that knowledge only comes from sensory experience, ie, empiricism. This is the faith that our five senses are enough to determine the nature of reality. It fails to note the nature of our contextual experiences, or impressions. Neither can it quantify an impression. The interpretation of scientific data is philosophical, and a scientific theory cannot actual prove anything. So, to base your complete faith in science I would say is fairly misguided.

" ... but the point is that He doesn't need to openly demonstrate His power to reach people. The number of Christians in the world speak to that."

Are the 8,000,000 cancer patients in the world also evidence of his power in reaching people? If so, we need to chemo the fucker out of this universe. You love citing numbers that can mean nothing except circumstance: Stupid exists and grows. It can be cured, but not by any tool religion offers. Science is the cure.

[KichigaiNeko]

And I am thinking that you are just mind fucking yourself luce...so sad

[BloodyHeretic]

I consider God to be a self-evident truth, which can be proven by reason alone; it is axiomatic.

Well I don't consider it a self evident truth, but feel free to prove it. I'm interested, if you can't, does that mean you'll abandon your faith?

[DeistPaladin]

No, they can't be easily dismissed. Dismiss this guys testimony:

700 Club.

Seriously?

Seriously?

We're done.

[Epimethean]

Lucent, obviously you have yourself set on a strong belief pattern, and it works for you. Most people around here consider it nuts, completely free of substance which can compel anyone who does not fall victim to hallucinations, delusions and mass forms of hypnotism to find any merit in it. Of course, this makes you a better xtian, because it shows your faith, but here at an atheist forum, not many are thinking you're going to gain anything from such an act of imagination.

Good luck, though.

[LastPoet]

No, they can't be easily dismissed. Dismiss this guys testimony:

700 Club.

Seriously?

Seriously?

We're done.

I actually didn't knew that site, so I opened a new tab, then inserted the address and BAM! Pat Robertson.

Yeah, he's done, so fucking high in jesus that any attempt to reason with him is fruitless.

[frankiej]

I'm sorry I jumped to the conclusion that you didn't want to know God on the basis that you were mocking and denigrating Him.

We mock him in the same way that we might mock Lucius Malfoy...

It doesn't matter, because he ain't real, mate.

[IATIA]

I consider God to be a self-evident truth, which can be proven by reason alone; it is axiomatic.

Well I don't consider it a self evident truth, but feel free to prove it. I'm interested, if you can't, does that mean you'll abandon your faith?

And it certainly is not axiomatic!