Since Heaven and Hell are not temporal ..

[Chad32]

Read history.
When your enemy tries to kill you and take everything you have, and your enemy looses-
he looses big time.
He FORFITS what he has.
It is called "Justice".

That's debatable. Granted taking what someone has helps ensure he won't be able to do it again soon, but instead of stealing their land the Jews could have told the UN and tried to get them to stop. Instead you've got two wrongs not making a right. If someone I hate gets into a fight with me, and I win, I don't get to take something of his on top of beating him up.

[Esquilax]

All you've said here is that you have an argument and it works, you didn't present it. …the same Aquinas…you've given in the past, and had debunked over and over?

Debunked? In your dreams, Esq. Your response, a kind of brute facts occationalism, provides no rational basis of effectiveness of the scientific method and violates the principle of sufficient reason.

My response was simply that Aquinas' arguments were nothing but assertions that A: violated their own premises to reach their conclusions, B: offered no evidence or justification in support of them, and C: defines problems into existence by fiat in order to demand they be solved, despite having no reason for thinking they even existed in the first place. Simply dismissing these, as you did back then too, is not a response, and does not diminish the truth of them.

Additionally, "no rational basis of effectiveness" for the scientific method? Does not the continued, demonstrable efficacy of those branches of science that do work count as a good enough basis? What more do you want, if centuries of consistent positive results aren't enough? And why aren't you asking the same of your god? Oh, and if you're tempted to again tell me what the scientific method just takes as givens, I'll just remind you that arguments from ignorance are not evidence against scientific efficacy, nor are they support for the unjustified ramblings of Aquinas.

Only within the scope of inquiries related to natural science. Science presupposes certain philosophical assumptions. That foundational need is why there is a specific area of rational inquiry called ‘Philosophy of Science.’

Yes, axioms exist. But they don't require god magic to support them; the whole point of axioms is to allow us to operate in accordance with the things we observe but don't necessarily have fully comprehensive answers for yet. You can't just point at them as evidence for god, because that would be, again, an argument from ignorance.

[Neo-Scholastic]

Does not the continued, demonstrable efficacy of those branches of science that do work count as a good enough basis?

Ready, fire, aim. My point was the that science IS efficacious. It's effectiveness has a reason: final causes are at play. Your explanation for the efficacy of science is boils down to 'it works because it works', i.e. circular reasoning.

[Godscreated]

Take your nonsensical 'metaphysical' ramblings to someplace where someone might give a shit. You want to prove to us your version of your sky fairy is real, give us what we want - something testable and verifiable.

I tried and everyone here wouldn't look at it, just made fun of the man and said his occupation limited him from understanding what he spent many years learning. Science and the Bible agreed and no one was interested, because you guys don't want the possibility of God being real, that would mean you would have to accept something you've spent years trying to run in the ground. You know that you would have to face Him and answer to all the things you have said about Him. You're not going to look at anything that science might have to show God exists, for you all the price is to high to admit you were wrong. Hint: better now than later. Also, one here said that one couldn't tell when an object in space was over a certain area, well here's the answer I can set on my front porch and tell you what town the sun sets on, the same for the moon and the same for certain stars. Not only that, there have been ancient cultures that precisely built building several miles apart, completely out of site of each other, and there walls actually lined up with the setting and or rising moon. that is the moon and the walls were in a perfect plane with each other, that's quite a feat, yet what a man discovered was a few years ago is called worthless by some here. Why because they probably couldn't find their way out of the wood at night, just to put it nicely.

GC

---

Read history.
When your enemy tries to kill you and take everything you have, and your enemy looses-
he looses big time.
He FORFITS what he has.
It is called "Justice".

That's debatable. Granted taking what someone has helps ensure he won't be able to do it again soon, but instead of stealing their land the Jews could have told the UN and tried to get them to stop. Instead you've got two wrongs not making a right. If someone I hate gets into a fight with me, and I win, I don't get to take something of his on top of beating him up.

You got his pride, bet he would have given you something if he knew the outcome.

GC

[abaris]

Not only that, there have been ancient cultures that precisely built building several miles apart, completely out of site of each other, and there walls actually lined up with the setting and or rising moon. that is the moon and the walls were in a perfect plane with each other, that's quite a feat, yet what a man discovered was a few years ago is called worthless by some here. Why because they probably couldn't find their way out of the wood at night, just to put it nicely.

GC

Well, that's not a miracle. They knew how to observe the sky and what it told them.

I don't know which man you're refering to and what his discovery is supposed to be.

As for me, I take my chances with your god. Your breed of christianity is only about 800 million strong and even within your group there are disagreements, let alone within the worlds population of about 7 billion. Add to this the fact that the bible is as coherent as a moron on speed, it doesn't exactly add to it's credibility. If you want to argue science being within the bible, it's only make belief and bending some verses that only in your mind make any other kind of sense than what bronze and iron age desert dwellers claimed to know about their environment. By the same token I can bend Nostradamus to make sense. Some do and most people call it for what it is - bullshit.

[dyresand]

Not only that, there have been ancient cultures that precisely built building several miles apart, completely out of site of each other, and there walls actually lined up with the setting and or rising moon. that is the moon and the walls were in a perfect plane with each other, that's quite a feat, yet what a man discovered was a few years ago is called worthless by some here. Why because they probably couldn't find their way out of the wood at night, just to put it nicely.

GC

Well, that's not a miracle. They knew how to observe the sky and what it told them.

I don't know which man you're refering to and what his discovery is supposed to be.

As for me, I take my chances with your god. Your breed of christianity is only about 800 million strong and even within your group there are disagreements, let alone within the worlds population of about 7 billion. Add to this the fact that the bible is as coherent as a moron on speed, it doesn't exactly add to it's credibility. If you want to argue science being within the bible, it's only make belief and bending some verses that only in your mind make any other kind of sense than what bronze and iron age desert dwellers claimed to know about their environment. By the same token I can bend Nostradamus to make sense. Some do and most people call it for what it is - bullshit.

Ancient mans evidence of god.



id buy into god making that if i were a ancient human. But its nature being nature and being beautiful when its not killing us.

[IATIA]

You're not going to look at anything that science might have to show God exists, ...

Apparently I missed this 'scientific proof'. Will you direct me or relay this 'proof"?

[The Valkyrie]

You're not going to look at anything that science might have to show God exists, ...

Apparently I missed this 'scientific proof'. Will you direct me or relay this 'proof"?

They always fail to provide actual scientific proof.

It's always some creationist claim.

[IATIA]

Hell, I know that, but sometimes I enjoy giving them the benefit of the doubt and looking to see what pops up, else what is the point in discussing a non-existent deity?

Even creationists have brought up a good point or two about radioactive dating and short of a flat-earther, there is little that is more ridiculous than believing the earth is 6000 years old.

[Brakeman]

there have been ancient cultures that precisely built building several miles apart, completely out of site of each other, and there walls actually lined up with the setting and or rising moon. that is the moon and the walls were in a perfect plane with each other, that's quite a feat, yet what a man discovered was a few years ago is called worthless by some here.
GC

Citation and precision needed.