(May 15, 2017 at 11:29 am)Harry Nevis Wrote:(May 15, 2017 at 9:53 am)SteveII Wrote: Notice that you didn't answer ANY of the questions. You just simply asserted your simple-minded position--which you seem quite satisfied with. Honestly, this is way above your head. You should stick to what you know best (which is decidedly NOT being even a mediocre apologist for atheism).
Because they're bullshit questions. And you know it, but just can't seem to understand how you're "god did it" answers don't convert the world. Fine tuning is all in your head. Why is there something instead of nothing? Your god is not an answer. [1]
No one has to be an "apologist" for atheism. I'm not trying to convert anyone, least of all you. It doesn't need defending to the thinking, rational, emotionally healthy segment of the population. We just have to point out the desperate rationalizations and contradictions of your belief. [2]
(May 15, 2017 at 11:19 am)SteveII Wrote: Evidence and reasons to believe in God:
1. Person of Jesus is compelling.
2. The NT describes actual events including the miracles, life, death and resurrection of Jesus.
3. God works in people's lives today--changing people on the inside as well as the occurrence of miracles.
4. The natural theology arguments:
a. God is the best explanation why anything at all exists.
b. God is the best explanation of the origin of the universe.
c. God is the best explanation of the fine-tuning of the universe for intelligent life.
d. God is the best explanation of intentional states of consciousness.
e. God is the best explanation of objective moral values and duties.
More bullshit answers to a simple question. Substitute any deity and it makes as much sense. You said in an earlier post how it bothers you when definitions are twisted to suit. But you use the term "best" as if there is an accepted definition that fits your context. There is no evidence of fine tuning or objective moral values, so there is no need for an "explanation" of them. [3]
1. You are just proving my point.
2. More definitions for you...
a·pol·o·get·ics
noun
from Greek ἀπολογία, "speaking in defense"
reasoned arguments or writings in justification of something, typically a theory or religious doctrine.
example: "free market apologetics"
However, it would make sense why your posts are so simplistic--your intention is not to defend your view of the world.
3. No, you cannot substitute any deity into my list.
Mohammad is not compelling.
No other religions has ANYWHERE near the equivalent of the NT.
Haven't heard many followers of Zeus claiming changed lives lately
And the five natural theology arguments could apply to any monotheistic God--oh wait, don't they all believe its the same God? Kind of lets all the air out of your point.
Fine tuning is a fact not in dispute (if you think so, you do not understand the issue at all). The argument is whether chance can account for it.
It certainly seems like there are objective moral values. The only reason to say there is not is because of a presupposition of naturalism--which is question begging.
