Theists: Why do you love God?

[Ace Otana]

Prove it.

well every time we find something organized we can infer that someone organized it example: stonehenge. they're just random big rocks that don't make anything complicated other than a circle, but we assume they were placed there by someone as we know of no natural process that can do that. how does applying the same to more complicated things make it different?

We know who built it, we know why. We understand it so deeply we can tell you in detail. What you're trying to do is compare man made structures to the universe. You cannot compare the two. We know that things can form on their own. With the help of gravity, matter is pulled together. Which is how this planet formed. 12 possibles of matter, 4 forces of nature and 13.7 billion years of interaction, and you don't think it's possible for planets, solar systems and galaxies to form on their own? You sir, lack a lot of knowledge. You are arguing from ignorance. You don't know any better.

[5thHorseman]

'well every time we find something organized we can infer that someone organized it'

This is the watchmaker analogy.

This is the problem with that analogy;

'here are three main arguments against the Watchmaker analogy. The first is that complex artifacts do not, in fact, require a designer, but can and do arise from "mindless" natural processes (as in the "Infinite Monkey Theorem"). The second argument is that the watch is a faulty analogy. The third argument is that the watchmaker is arguably a far more complex organism than the watch, and if complexity proves intelligent design, then the question arises: who designed such a complex designer?'(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watchmaker_...#Criticism)

[chi pan]

We know who built it, we know why. We understand it so deeply we can tell you in detail.

is that so?

The Stonehenge site, 5,000 years old (new discoveries place it far back in history), still remains of the world’s greatest archeological mysteries. One of its biggest question marks revolves around its conception. It’s fairly understood why it was build, as a site of sun worshiping, but how it was actually built remains unknown, considering these slabs of stone weigh around 20-25 tones each and had to be transported from quarries many miles away.

-http://www.zmescience.com/science/archaeology/stonehenge-stones-origins-314345/

[Soyouz]

The reason they love God is because it makes them feel safe, they always have something to fall back on.
Another reason is obviously fear, theists mostly lack understanding and knowledge hence the belief. If they delude themselves into thinking that they share a deep bond with a diety it makes them feel stronger.


Off topic: Unbelievable how some people can believe the universe is 6000-10000 years old, almost makes me want to cry.

[Ace Otana]

We know who built it, we know why. We understand it so deeply we can tell you in detail.

is that so?

The Stonehenge site, 5,000 years old (new discoveries place it far back in history), still remains of the world’s greatest archeological mysteries. One of its biggest question marks revolves around its conception. It’s fairly understood why it was build, as a site of sun worshiping, but how it was actually built remains unknown, considering these slabs of stone weigh around 20-25 tones each and had to be transported from quarries many miles away.

-http://www.zmescience.com/science/archaeology/stonehenge-stones-origins-314345/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge
Just like I said, in detail. Did you think that I meant complete 100% knowledge by any chance?
You theists, you'll grab at anything to try and keep your arguments afloat. It's rather amusing.

[chi pan]

the most important part is how it was built. without it how can you say anything else? it's like saying people build tables for setting things on them and eating off them but we don't know how they did it.

[Ace Otana]

the most important part is how it was built. without it how can you say anything else? it's like saying people build tables for setting things on them and eating off them but we don't know how they did it.

It's thought that they cut the blocks to size and rolled them with the use of logs and pure man power. It's not impossible. The Egyptians managed to cut out and move huge stone blocks and created huge pyramids out of them. Thousands and thousands of stone blocks, no machines. Just rope and man power. You don't give the ancients much credit do you?

[chi pan]

It's thought that they cut the blocks to size and rolled them with the use of logs and pure man power. It's not impossible. The Egyptians managed to cut out and move huge stone blocks and created huge pyramids out of them. Thousands and thousands of stone blocks, no machines. Just rope and man power. You don't give the ancients much credit do you?

that explination does not appear in your source that i see. and first, these stones are much more massive than those used for the pyramids. second, egypt had a lot more manpower. third, i have a source i already stated that says we don't exactly know how they moved those 25 ton rocks.

A does not prove B without first proving A. Also, if we don't know what caused X that doesn't make Y the default answer. God is never the default answer.

it doesn't have to be the default answer, however if it's impossible that these things came to be on their own, then that leaves a designer. it's the only other option. like in math if x does not equal a negative number or zero then it must equal a positive number.

[Ace Otana]

that explination does not appear in your source that i see. and first, these stones are much more massive than those used for the pyramids. second, egypt had a lot more manpower. third, i have a source i already stated that says we don't exactly know how they moved those 25 ton rocks.

I never mentioned 'know' pal. However it is highly probable. It was on the discovery channel. A rather interesting program. Doesn't matter how they built it, the fact is, they did.

it doesn't have to be the default answer, however if it's impossible that these things came to be on their own, then that leaves a designer. it's the only other option.

No it doesn't. Actually if that were true we'd be taking 2 steps back in knowledge, not forward. God is still not an answer because he/it/thing hasn't been demonstrated to exist yet. A does not prove B without first proving A.
Besides, you haven't demonstrated that it is impossible. You've only given your opinion, nothing else.

[chi pan]

No it doesn't. Actually if that were true we'd be taking 2 steps back in knowledge, not forward. God is still not an answer because he/it/thing hasn't been demonstrated to exist yet. A does not prove B without first proving A.

ok, i'll provide some evidence. the best i can provide at this time is a boat. one found in the mountains in Turkey. it fits the description as said in the bible as 'Noah's ark." coincidence? most likely not. for more evidence i'll do some research and get back to you