Evidence God Exists: Part II

[Paul the Human]

Why don't you lighten up, Paul?

Because I'm worried about you, Angel. I'm just so afraid that...

Just kidding! I'm just trying to give you some advice. It seems as if you've gotten off on the wrong foot with some of us and I thought you might be worth fixing the problem. Forgive me my trespasses if I was wrong about that.

[Welsh cake]

Fully understanding something which has already been discovered is one thing (as with gravity). But completely failing to reproduce a scenario, and continuing to try for 500 years with no end in sight, is another (as with abiogenesis). At which point do scientists finally admit their experiments failed? For arguments' sake, let's say that the reality is that life cannot be produced from inanimate matter. At which point do scientific experiments prove that reality?

Let's say scientists try to invent a time travel machine. After how much time will they finally realize that their experiments have proven that a time travel machine is an impossibility?

Gravity, like life, is demonstrably real and can be observed as manifesting itself within reality, we still don't completely understand exactly how they work, we quintessentially have an 'incomplete jigsaw on the table' if you will; but to assume with loaded statements that we'll never fully understand how life came to be and should give up right now and believe in sky daddy is nothing more than an Argument from Incredulity. Are you omnipotent? Where did you arrive at that conclusion from? This is knowledge that neither you nor I have of whether these things are possible nor impossible to discern, and to assume answers when you have none is as arrogant as it is presumptuous.

Like a time-travelling machine, I don't know if abiogenesis is possible, how do you know that it's not possible?

Are experiments for abiogenesis to remain open-ended and inconclusive for eternity?

You are assuming the answers will never be found again, not to mention "eternity" is merely a concept that we made up.

Believers don't view God as supernatural. God is nature.

Pantheism/Panentheism is but one (or two whichever) world-view of many. You don't speak for all believers Angel, who may hold differing beliefs in Monotheism, Deism, Henotheism or Monolatrism.

[AngelThMan]

...Forgive me my trespasses if I was wrong about that.

Thanks for saying that. Like I said, I always had some level of respect for you, though lately we both got a little cranky. I doubt we'll agree much, but no reason why we can't be friendly adversaries.

[Paul the Human]

...Forgive me my trespasses if I was wrong about that.

Thanks for saying that. Like I said, I always had some level of respect for you, though lately we both got a little cranky. I doubt we'll agree much, but no reason why we can't be friendly adversaries.

Agreed. I always try to be nice, polite, and patient. Admittedly, I have lost my patience with you a couple of times and made jokes at your expense; call it frustration. My goal is never to 'convert' someone to atheism, only to encourage healthy inquiry and self-education. One way to do that is to engage in productive discussion. So... here's to future discussions being productive. *raises his coffee cup on high before taking a sip*

P.S. It's still not evidence! Heheh!

[Welsh cake]

Angel, a friendly suggestion, for someone who demands respect from us, you really need to brush up on your Internet etiquette yourself. Playing the "I'm ignoring you" game is getting really old, really fast.

Kindly respond to the relevant statements in this discussion *you started* or at least bother to acknowledge the counterarguments everyone's been making for last dozen pages or so.


Tweedle Dum: If you think we're waxworks, you ought to pay, you know.
Tweedle Dee: Contrarywise, if you think we're alive you ought to speak to us.
Tweedle Dee, Tweedle Dum: That's logic.

[Samson]

Shouldn't that be combined together, "Orangutan"....

Well,yes and no. That's how it's written in English. However,the word is actually composed off two Malay/Indonesian words 'orang' (man) and (h)utan (forest) It's usually translated as ' man of the forest' which is how I always think of them,having lived in Malaysia and seen them in the wild*

Probably an unfair analogy;Orangs are beautiful and intelligent creatures and can be taught. This does not apply to most apologists ,who argue from a position of personal certitude,unable/ unwilling to entertain the possibility of error.. ..


*by 'them' I mean two, once,40 odd years ago in deep jungle on army patrol..

Thanks for the Breakdown....And I agree on this part by far..lol.."Probably an unfair analogy;Orangs are beautiful and intelligent creatures and can be taught. This does not apply to most apologists ,who argue from a position of personal certitude,unable/ unwilling to entertain the possibility of error.. ..

---

Maybe Adrian is a gentleman and can argue a point intelligently and politely even with someone who disagrees with him, and not like the two of you, who can only behave like orangutans.

Please tell me how I have behaved in such a way....To you....

I asked you a few simple questions, and you never responded....Not that I'm loosing sleep over it, but after reading your posts for the past 15 pages, a person can get a pretty clear idea of where someones head is or is not....

[AngelThMan]

...Forgive me my trespasses if I was wrong about that.

Thanks for saying that. Like I said, I always had some level of respect for you, though lately we both got a little cranky. I doubt we'll agree much, but no reason why we can't be friendly adversaries.

Agreed. I always try to be nice, polite, and patient. Admittedly, I have lost my patience with you a couple of times and made jokes at your expense; call it frustration. My goal is never to 'convert' someone to atheism, only to encourage healthy inquiry and self-education. One way to do that is to engage in productive discussion. So... here's to future discussions being productive. *raises his coffee cup on high before taking a sip*

P.S. It's still not evidence! Heheh!

Awesome. Let's get back to business. Yes, it is!

---

Maybe Adrian is a gentleman and can argue a point intelligently and politely even with someone who disagrees with him, and not like the two of you, who can only behave like orangutans.

Please tell me how I have behaved in such a way....To you....

You probably haven't, but you did participate in this orangutan joke, and I was just throwing it back at you.

I asked you a few simple questions, and you never responded....

As I told Adrian recently, with the amount of responses, this would be a full-time job for me if I answered every single question. A lot of times the question has been addressed, but people haven't read it, which is understandable as these are such enormous threads.

....after reading your posts for the past 15 pages, a person can get a pretty clear idea of where someones head is or is not....

I'll admit I've been sidetracked by nonsense the last few pages.

Anyway, it's Mother's Day and I have to go see my mother, so I won't be posting for a few hours. Happy Mother's Day, y'all!

[Minimalist]

It seems as if you've gotten off on the wrong foot with some of us and I thought you might be worth fixing the problem.

I disagree, Paul. He's gotten off on exactly the foot he set out to use. He believes in fairy tales and is going to keep telling us that we should believe in them too.

There is nothing more to him than that.

[Watson]

*sigh* I can't begin to understand why you'd be so intentionally wrapped up in such a silly exercise of self-deception

Speak for yourself.

while advocating your concept for god as some kind of 'universal truth' we've all wilfully ignoring.

God, as I have come to know Him and understand Him, is a part of every one and every thing. That means that He is just as much a part of you as He is a part of me. So, from my beliefs and my perspective, denying God's existence is like denying you have an arm or a leg; it is simply ridiculous.

Were you trying to impress us with a "story" of conversion to theism? Would that make your argument somehow more credible?

No, I was not trying to impress anyone at all. I was trying to illustrate the ways in which God works and how He can be revealed to a person, even an Atheist such as I considered myself. This is because the problem with discussing religion and God with any Atheist is that they simply do not understand God. Thus, to get anywhere in a dicussion with an Atheist, theists and believers must first educate them on how God works, then move on to other topics of discussion.

People occasionally move between states of belief and non-belief, for various reasons throughout their lives. When I cared more about truth than religion I deconverted from Christianity. Simply stating atheists can convert is irrelevant to any argument for god's existence and utterly redundant in any case -

As I said above, the purpose of my stating Atheists can convert is so I may demonstrate to you how God works and go from there. You misunderstand or find contention with the lesson.

everyone is born an atheist to begin with!

Wrong. By my beliefs, everyone is born with the utmost perfect belief; a belief not bogged down with religious names and confusion.

Right now, you are making claims about the universe and beings that exist within reality that could possibly damage people’s wealth or health if taken out of context.

Wealth? What has wealth got to do with anything at all?

Sure, I agree with you; when dealing in terms of God, there is always the possibility that someone will take the message out of its context and warp it to fit their own perspective. This is human nature. This is why I state that we are born with perfect belief; we have not bee introduced to our own individual likes and dislikes yet, and thus we have not had a chance to form a perspective about the world which could blind us from God and His teachings.

Don't expect people to be convinced by your arguments if you can't even manage being intellectually honest about yourself Watson.

I reiterate, speak for yourself.

-----------------------------

Well, I say I don't know what "True Atheist" means because, n my belief, I have yet to truly meet a "True Atheist", and I never will. I mean no disrespect by it, I just don't believe in "True" Atheism.
I am an Agnostic Christian, which means I believe in the teachings, I believe in the ideas and principles of the Christian religion, but I do not know them or claim them to be true.

I'll disregard the part on your non-belief in someone being a True Atheist, but I am curious to know how you can state that you "Believe" in the teachings, Principles and Ideas of the Christian religion but/and also state you do not know them or claim them to be true?? That's simply a paradox in what you stated...

What I meant when I said that was, I believe in the Christian teachings, principles and ideals, and have found them to be true in my observances and experiences throughout life, but I do not claim to know if they are real or not. I.e.- I have never literally met Jesus Christ in the flesh, I have never spoken with an angel or with a manifestation of God, at least ot in the English language, et cetera, et cetera.

Furthermore, my belief in God is quite seperate from my Christianity, and based on my own personal experience, coupled with my observations of the world around me. I have read very little of the Bible, but I am aware of it's contents and meaning through study of this life I am living.

I do understand your meaning in the separation of a personal god in which you believe in, however, you could get just as much morality and personal content out of a self help to happiness book than the Christian one....

I am applying the lessons I have learned throughout life to the Bible, and in so-doing, I gain more understanding of the Christian religion and its beliefs.

I don't plan on adding a sect of any kind, this is simply my personal experience with Christianity as I understand it. My interpretation of Christianity is based on my observations of God, rather than the other way around.

When you state your observations of god, in what way do you mean?

I have had experiences throughout life which I can not explain, nor can anyone else explain, as being anything more likely than God. These experiences are things which are very real to me, and which can only be explained or make sense through a theist view-point.

Well, if it helps; I choose Christianity because I find it the most broad in understanding and the best at describing the phenomenon we call 'life', the being we call 'God.' I also find that certain other religions do this very well, too, but none quite so precisely as Christianity. That is my take on it; a Muslim or a Buddhist may have a different take, just as you and the other Atheists on this site have differents take completely.
I believe they are Christian, but are not recognized as such because of the level of misrepresentation coming from Fundamentalists and other nutjobs.

I would say they are little more relaxed in comparison to the Islamic faith. The sad part is that the fundamentalist nutjobs you wrote about make up the majority here in the U.S. I can't speak for how it is in other countries who call themselves Christians.

It is unfortunate, but such is human nature. People are bound to misinterpret, warp, or otherwise take out of context what they read in books, see on TV, or simply hear from word of mouth. It permeates our society, even in things outside of religion.

Christianity has more depth to it than some would like to think, and takes a lot of study for one to undertsand it's true, underlying meaning.

The only depth and meaning is from the person that is giving it that, depth and meaning. There is reason for so many branches of faith based beliefs coming from one book. In the end, the bottom line is still human perception, not the label.

I agree with this. Our perception is largely based on what we believe in; believing in a world with God reveals His markings quite clearly; believing in a world with no God reveals a quite Godless looking world. Only if you understand God, however, will you be able to see His nature for what it truly is.

Thank you for your well wishes, haha. I do believe in a personal God; I believe that all major and minor religions out there are simply an attempt at describing that God in the best way they know how. Some have it better than others, and I only add the 'Agnostic' label to my Christianity because I merely believe in Jesus Christ and his teachings; I have no way of absolutely knowing for certain if He ever walk this earth.

For me personally, I believe there probably was a "Man" named Jesus or Yewah, or whatever, that tried to "Preach" to his people... I just look at him as being another human being spreading their opinions of what they believe to be truth, when it comes life of course... No more, no less....

Well, in a sense, I also believe this. Jesus was simply a man, a son of God just as I am a son of God. The difference between He and I, however, was that He was supposedly the prodigal son of God. Prodigal indicating He was a protege, He would have been connected and in tune with the lessons of God in such a way as to be adept, nearly perfect, at them, and at understanding and teaching them.

[Zen Badger]

God, as I have come to know Him and understand Him, is a part of every one and every thing. That means that He is just as much a part of you as He is a part of me. So, from my beliefs and my perspective, denying God's existence is like denying you have an arm or a leg; it is simply ridiculous.

Except I have demonstratable empirical evidence for my limbs.

Something that you have yet to produce for your god.